France Accuses Iran of Supermarket Fridge Hacking (bbc.com) 160
France has accused Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps of being behind last month's cyberattacks on fridges and freezers across the country. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said the attack was "unprecedented in both its scale and its level of aggression," adding those who were responsible would be hit with sanctions "at the European level." The BBC reports: The cyber-attack last month saw fridges and freezers in hundreds of supermarkets across France heated up, which spoilt fresh and frozen food estimated to be worth millions of euros. Then last week, dozens of supermarkets across several other European countries were also impacted by a cyber-attack that targeted fridges and freezers. It is not known if the instances are linked.
Barrot said the attack on France's supermarkets "marks the first large-scale cyber-attack aimed at sabotage on our national territory, and it constitutes a major attack on the nation's interests and the security of the French people." He said the government had summoned the Iranian ambassador to Paris to "lodge a very strong protest against this extremely grave act." France will take "any other necessary and proportionate measures" to respond to the incident and "deter anyone who might seek to repeat it," Barrot added.
Separately on Monday, the Paris prosecutor said an investigation had been opened into the head of an offensive cyber unit associated with Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as well as his two deputies. Laure Beccuau named the unit as Shahid Kaveh, which she said had an affiliation with the electronic and cyber centre of the IRGC. Shahid Kaveh is the name given to a cluster of hackers thought to be directly employed by the Iranian regime. [...] The French government has not said how it reached the conclusion that Iran was responsible, and attribution of cyber attacks is extremely hard as hackers are able to hide their locations.
Barrot said the attack on France's supermarkets "marks the first large-scale cyber-attack aimed at sabotage on our national territory, and it constitutes a major attack on the nation's interests and the security of the French people." He said the government had summoned the Iranian ambassador to Paris to "lodge a very strong protest against this extremely grave act." France will take "any other necessary and proportionate measures" to respond to the incident and "deter anyone who might seek to repeat it," Barrot added.
Separately on Monday, the Paris prosecutor said an investigation had been opened into the head of an offensive cyber unit associated with Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as well as his two deputies. Laure Beccuau named the unit as Shahid Kaveh, which she said had an affiliation with the electronic and cyber centre of the IRGC. Shahid Kaveh is the name given to a cluster of hackers thought to be directly employed by the Iranian regime. [...] The French government has not said how it reached the conclusion that Iran was responsible, and attribution of cyber attacks is extremely hard as hackers are able to hide their locations.
The EU (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it will probably be more polite than nasty.
Re: The EU (Score:3, Insightful)
Is anyone asking if there is any evidence that the French accusations are true? I mean, Iran doesn't even have any specific beef with the French right now, and I'm sure their cyber resources are fully utilised elsewhere rather than diverting time and manpower pulling off what amounts to a prank.
Re: (Score:2)
I have no idea who was behind it - but yes, Iran is "annoyed" at France - because for a long time, it was France who was blocking adding IRGC to the EU's terrorists organisation list.
Although, if that is the cause then Iran didn't think it through properly, because what they've achieved is France being even more willing to impose sanctions on Iran.
Something happened in January 2026 that significantly changed France's position towards Iran. It's not obvious from what I've seen in the news whether it was just
Re: The EU (Score:1)
So, they'll divert cyber attack resources away from attacking the US and Israel who are about to bomb the crap out of them, to a campaign to ruin steak in Carrefour? That doesn't make sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Will send Iran a very nasty letter. I'm sure of it.
"Now go away or i shall taunt you a second time!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: The EU (Score:2)
I'll raise you
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Fc... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I'll raise you
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Fc... [youtube.com]
Lol. fair, that's more directly on point. (it's been 22 years?!) (America , f yeah!)
Re: (Score:2)
Mail all the rotting meat to them.
Re: (Score:1)
Nah....just all the PORK, and associated liquids and blood.
And maybe air drop it rather than mail it....that'll get them where it hurts.
Grow A Pair (Score:2)
I guess Macaroni is to busy shitting himself over internal rioting to deal with something like this.
I wonder how Naziette Le Pen would deal with this.
If you have proof that Iran is responsible for this attack and you're not retaliating exponentially harder, you lost.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Grow A Pair (Score:5, Insightful)
Retaliate with what? The US has backed Iran into a corner and since the admin did not have the fortitude to actually follow through with the regime change part of their regime change war there's little to be gained from more sanctions or more bombs. The regime survived so now if we want them out it's troops-on-the-ground, no civilian uprising is going to take the day over there.
This is also a time where allies is important then you can present a united front against a nation like Iran but since the US decided being the hegemon was "woke and lame" responses are disparate. All of Trumps "America First" has predictably left America alone.
EU still has that little war still happening next door to them from Iran's ally they are still handling with less and less US help as it is. I don;t exactly blame them for not wanting a hot war in the Middle East.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just laying out reality bub, Iran's regime is intact, all your talking points won't change that.
All your sure talk and here we are talking about hacks on European nations and Saudi Aramco building is under attack. [aljazeera.com]
Everything's under control folks!
Re:Grow A Pair (Score:4, Interesting)
If you ignore the hype and look at whats actually happening, it doesn’t look like regime change was ever the goal in Iran. That woukd require serious boots on the ground and a LOT of dead US soldiers. Instead, we stuck to standoff fighting and targeted their main military assets and their economy, but just enough to avoid triggering a “well, we’re f*cked might as well fire ALL the missiles” response from Iran. In other words, we’re engaged in a carefully measured siege war designed to crater their economy and remove their future leverage (the world being forced to adapt to commerce without the straight of hormuz, etc. etc.).
I genuinely think that most people, and most of the media, misunderstand the US-Iran war. Pretty badly. The goal was never a decisive victory parade through Tehran, Our goal is to shrink their power. To weaken them seriously. Without triggering a full-scale burn-it-all type of war. We’re trying to engineer a situation 5 years down the road, when Xi is seriously jonesing to invade Taiwan, and he looks around for allies and realizes that he has none. Russia could have helped, but they’re busy punching the brick wall that we call Ukraine and they’re gonna need 2 generations to recover. Iran could have helped, but we’re taking them off the chess board too. We’re engaging in a small war now in order to make WW3 far less likely.
So far, it’s cost us 23 casualties. Any casualty is sad, but it’s orders of magnitude below what was happening during the vietnam and korean wars. Money? Meh, we were gonna spend that money on the military anyways. Every day an aircraft carrier floats on the water costs an eye-bleeding amount, but I’m not sure how much the amount changes if the carrier is stationed off the coast of Nantucket, or off the coast of Iran.
Re: (Score:2)
That's an intriguing analysis and raises points I hadn't considered. I'm wondering though, how Iran might have been helpful in any meaningful way in the taking of Taiwan.
I'm also wondering if Iran really has been seriously weakened by America; although as I understand it the US has been seriously weakened, in that their arms cupboard is looking pretty bare these days.
And if there really is some 3D chess behind America's recent military moves, who's the grandmaster? It sure as hell isn't Trump, and I don't s
Re:Grow A Pair (Score:4, Insightful)
Thankfully, that’s extremely unlikely now, because Russia miscalculated sooooo badly in Ukraine, and we’re currently stomping Iran back a decade or three. If China gets aggressive, they’ll have to do it solo. Any allies they have will be too small or weak to help much.
For sure our commander in chief isn’t the one directing this. Neither is Hegseth. That guy is a legit decorated veteran, but he hadnt commanded any more than 50 people before joining fox news as an angry shouting chisle-jaw face. I suspect that the actual planning is being left to the people who actually know what they’re doing, because both Trump and Hegseth know full well that actually “playing general” would result in lots and lots of US soldiers in body bags, and that’s a reeealllyy bad look on social media.
Full disclosure - I get my info from The Economist. If what I read is correct, Iran’s air defenses are largely zero at this point, so we can fly wherever we want and pop anything we want. Their oil revenues are getting choked to near zero as well, their oil infrastructure is gonna rot over time, venezuela-style, because an embargoed economy has a hard time getting replacement components, and between the US and Israel, their industrial capacity has taken a hit. The IRGC will survive, and they’ll claim that as a victory, but they will rule a seriously weakened country.
The US can build more missiles. Iran will have a harder time, and it’ll get worse for them the longer the embargo lasts. The point of a siege/embargo is to slowly eat away at the adversaries capabilities.
There will never be a feel-good “we won” moment. The payoff is that two seriously disruptive countries (Russia and Iran) are forced to pull in their horns a bit, and China doesnt invade Taiwan because doing it without allies would be a literal nightmare. And everyone except the US gets to keep their pride because nobody admits defeat.
Re: (Score:2)
There are 3 countries that are a) opposed to the US and would like to reshape the world along different lines, b) big enough to make a difference, c) positioned in important geographic spots, d) with a big enough economy, e) with a big enough military, and f) they might be willing to bleed to make it happen. It’s a short list. China, Russia, Iran.
You should add North Korea to that list. A simultaneous attack by China and N Korea would pose a dilemma.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
So far, it's cost us 23 casualties. Any casualty is sad, but it's orders of magnitude below what was happening during the vietnam and korean wars. Money? Meh, we were gonna spend that money on the military anyways. Every day an aircraft carrier floats on the water costs an eye-bleeding amount, but I'm not sure how much the amount changes if the carrier is stationed off the coast of Nantucket, or off the coast of Iran.
Let's see. When we withdrew from Afghanistan in 2021, 13 service members were killed and the republicans screamed for formal criminal prosecutions or court-martials of top military commanders. Now that 23 service members have been killed the new party line is "well, it's still less than Vietnam"?
The cost of deploying an aircraft carrier in peacetime is not zero, but depleting 80% of our arsenal with replacement costs of a trillion dollars and twenty years to do it is not the same. Hegseth has also hidden
Re: Grow A Pair (Score:3)
>>The goal was never a decisive victory
No one in the trump administration knew what was going to happen or planned for what happened. Everything that happened was by chance. There was no plan.
Re: (Score:2)
So what part of this 5D chess that Trump was supposedly playing was the midterms fiasco? Because at least to some extent this was down to the very unpopular Iran war and all the economic problems it caused, and is still causing. I have a very hard time imagining Trump sacrificing personal popularity for some long-term geopolitical goals. Not that those make a huge amount of sense either.
In other words, we’re engaged in a carefully measured siege war designed to crater their economy and remove their future leverage (the world being forced to adapt to commerce without the straight of hormuz, etc. etc.).
Iran never got much leverage or economic benefit out of the straits of Hormuz before. They're getting a huge amount of lev
Re: Grow A Pair (Score:2)
No problem, they just didn't send them supplies
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just laying out reality bub, Iran's regime is intact, all your talking points won't change that.
The regime didn't instantly collapse so everyone should just admit defeat, give up and go home.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you also going to give Alaska to Putin?
Weaksauce is you all capitulating to Putin like the gaped little losers you are so you can eat all of my shit before I'll take anything critical from your Russian supporting ass.
It's not about fortitude (Score:2)
Trump and the Republican party lost an election over $4 a gallon gas. I can't even imagine what would happen if he had gone through the invasion and occupation and the necessary draft.
In case you're wondering if I'm pulling that out of my ass go lo
Re: (Score:3)
" The US has backed Iran into a corner"
LOLno. Iran did so much damage the whole world is suffering on petroleum prices right now, and Iran knows what position it holds.
The US is backed into a corner and Trump is about to get his ass reamed by the rest of the fucking planet.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah that's my point, I guess cornered is a bit inaccurate, "nothing to lose" is more what I'm getting at. They are already in open warfare with the largest military on Earth and unless that military wants a full scale invasion they really can't be threatened anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.iranintl.com/en/20... [iranintl.com]
Iran shows off new underground missile site
https://www.the-express.com/ne... [the-express.com]
Iran attacks ship in Hormuz
https://www.yahoo.com/news/pol... [yahoo.com]
British foreign minister Ed Miliband urged an "all-out diplomatic effort" to end the conflict, warning a stalemate of "no war, no peace" was causing economic damage.
"The status quo is bad economically for us and it's not a stable equilibrium," said Miliband, urging a full reopening of the Strait of Hormuz energy transit hub.
Re: (Score:2)
Retaliate with what?
Retaliate with arming the Iranians.
The US has backed Iran into a corner and since the admin did not have the fortitude to actually follow through with the regime change part of their regime change war there's little to be gained from more sanctions or more bombs. The regime survived so now if we want them out it's troops-on-the-ground, no civilian uprising is going to take the day over there.
US accidental "strategy" of bleeding the regime is already paying dividends by denying Iran's terror proxies throughout the region access to money and weapons to further fuel their chaos. They can barely even pay or feed their own military and the rial is on the brink of becoming worthless. The vast majority of the Iranian population views the oppressive murderous regime occupying Iran as illegitimate. Internal disaffection and armed opposition is only on the rise.
These
Re: (Score:2)
That's a way for internal chaos, criminal gangs and death.
This ship has already sailed. The Iranian regime has already imported criminal gangs from neighboring countries to harass and murder Iranian civilians.
The civilian population doesn't want that and the civilians and organizers fighting the regime don't want that.
The population is asking to be armed and wants to rid themselves of the murderous regime that has been brutally oppressing and murdering them for decades.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Grow A Pair (Score:5, Informative)
Leftists didn't make Trump start this war, you did.
Re: (Score:2)
"Leftists"
Spotted the Russian shill. What's it like sucking Putin's cock?
Re: (Score:2)
Pandering to leftists holy shit is that best you can do? This is new orders? When the email with your talking points comes in did your heart drop?
Re: (Score:2)
Democrats in America (leftists everywhere) have been calling on Trump to go easy on the ayatollahs.
Give me your strongest example of this.
Re: (Score:2)
lol you are so mind raped. I notice you never provide links, just AI summaries.
Also December 2026? That ain't the beginning of the war!
Also I am so glad Murphy and Van Hollen have so much of the Presidents ear. What, he can't think for himself? He's so weak and cucked he'll take any criticism to affect military decisions thus putting troops in harms way? Maybe he shouldn't be CiC eh?
Re: Grow A Pair (Score:2)
You're probably arguing with the same child rape enthusiasts who keep following me around demanding I swear fealty to the west by condemning Islam on command.
Re: (Score:2)
It's always a game of "dumb-as-rocks American" vs "paid Russian agitator" and the fact there is really no difference doesn't penetrate their overcooked oatmeal brains
Re: (Score:2)
Me; balanced, thriving, moisturized, watching my political enemies flail about. [tenor.com]
Re: (Score:2)
What a strategy, your opponents do a thing, you then undo said thing then claim they never did anything. Too bad the public doesn't seem to be buying it anymore.
Sorry but Trump, Vance, Rubio and the rest eat all of this war. You broke it you bought it.
Re: (Score:2)
Remove the "No New Wars" chip
Insert the "We've been at war with iran for 40 years" chip.
New talking points installed!
Re: (Score:2)
since you are here ... (Score:2)
jp morgan, blackrock, fmi, fic, mic, cia, mossad, mi6 ... all this is just new colonialism, which is basically old class war oriented outward. except they're loosing outside so it is already starting to shift inward. since you are here spouting nonsense on slashdot you are likely not part of that select elite which means that soon they'll come after you too. first your services, then your money, then your rights, eventually your very american flesh and bones.
save for later (Score:2)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
zzz ... (Score:1)
If you have proof that Iran is responsible for this attack and you're not retaliating exponentially harder, you lost.
if he had any proof i guess he would have shown it.
Victim blaming is appropriate here (Score:5, Insightful)
Refrigeration equipment should not be connected to the internet in any way beyond read-only monitoring of the system's operating state/temperature/error status/etc. Ideally, the monitoring hardware should be air gapped from the circuitry that actually controls the refrigeration system.
Yes, that means a human will have to physically go mess with the equipment when it isn't working properly, but speaking as someone in the trade - it usually is the case that a malfunction requires human intervention to replace a failed part, unclog a drain, or locate a refrigerant leak, in order to get things running properly again.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
So, you think only toasters should be allowed [livinginternet.com]? You're a thermist.
Re: (Score:2)
This.
Re:Victim blaming is appropriate here (Score:4, Interesting)
Not just when it isn't working properly. They will have to have someone adjust the fridges all day, every day.
In Europe they pay a spot price for electricity that varies with demand and availability. Consumers pay a flat rate, but large businesses can save huge amounts of money by reducing demand when electricity is expensive, and increasing it when electricity is cheap.
So they have their fridges follow the price, while keeping them within the legal limits. If electricity is cheap they might drop an extra degree or two, then coast through the expensive periods.
Chances are they save far more than these incidents have cost them, and they will be insured, so they will not be air gapping anything. They will try to secure it and continue saving money.
Re: (Score:2)
Does Iran have a motive? (Score:4, Insightful)
What would Iran gain from messing with France?
I'd think Mr. Putin would have more of a motive, since France (along with most of Europe) is supporting his opponent in Ukraine and he seems to be trying to probe their resolve by "accidentally" sending drones into their airspace from time to time.
Re:Does Iran have a motive? (Score:4, Insightful)
Yep. What's more, the hack was probably not hard at all. No reason to need state actors at all.
Re: (Score:2)
The country with the most to gain is probably the US - how else could they get France to help with their Iran situation?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They wan
Re: Does Iran have a motive? (Score:2)
That's also why American evangelicals would do it, though.
Re: Does Drinky have a motive... (Score:2)
And I'm going to keep going it, too, because it makes you mad.
Re: (Score:1)
Too many people trying to trigger a mass rapture via chaos
Re: (Score:3)
Think of it from Iran's POV, the USA, the largest military in history threw themselves at them and while they lost some leaders their regime is intact and they are probably more in a power position then they have been before in recent history.
The regime outlasted the sanctions and outlasted the bombing, outside of a ground invasion what else do they have to fear? There's nothing holding them back from lashing out at their enemies which includes the EU, look at how they are bombing the Saudis and other nati
Re: (Score:2)
I don't expect that Iran fears a ground invasion, which would almost certainly fail to achieve any valuable objectives, would likely result in mass US casualties, and could be seen as another significant win for Iran.
I think Iran should be more concerned about civilian infrastructure targets and potential nuclear weapons, both of which would seem to encourage them to develop nuclear weapons. Iran's retaliation for such attacks could be in
Re: (Score:2)
Authoritarian regimes ALWAYS appear strong and indestructible, until they suddenly aren't, get overthrown, and everyone stands around explaining just exactly why it happened and why they could see it coming.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, what in your mind is how you think the war ends? What's the deal look like?
Re: (Score:2)
Allowed or prevented by who? And who are they to control the actions of another nation? Do you really think Israelica started this war to prevent Iran from oppressing and slaughtering its own people, which is in the interest of that conglomerate? Then why would the Israelica try to stop oppression and slaughter in Iran but not in other countries where similar things occur, where many of those other countries don't even hav
Re: (Score:2)
Allowed or prevented by who? And who are they to control the actions of another nation?
The Iranian regimes waging of "revolution" against the rest of the world (see Iraq, Yemen, Syria and Lebanon..etc) makes the regimes aggression everyone's business.
Then why would the Israelica try to stop oppression and slaughter in Iran but not in other countries where similar things occur, where many of those other countries don't even have significant militaries? Do you really think that stopping oppression or slaughter has been a motive in *any* American war?
Yes, Clinton responded to the Srebrenica massacre with force despite a lack of credible national interest.
While opposition to oppression and massacre is of course a motive for action it may not be sufficient in and of itself. For example a lack of realistic means or costs unaligned with motives and national interests. In the case of Iran this i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I am not great at prediction, but I think that regime change in Iran is as unlikely or more now than it was before this war.
The regime and its proxies are considerably weaker now. They now have difficulties paying their foreign proxies to remain in Iran or their own soldiers. Disenchantment amongst the people and factions of the regime are growing.
I also think that Iran has much more incentive to pursue nuclear weapons now than it had before this war.
The past is history. There does not in the present seem to be a credible path forward on nukes short of regime change.
Iran also seems better aligned with Russia and China now than it was before this war.
Iran has been providing Russia with drones to kill Ukrainians for years and now in return in its hour of need Russia has done jack diddly squat to provide air defens
Re:Does Iran have a motive? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure. Because Israel knows everything there is to know about a "thriving liberal democracy". /sarc
Unless, of course, genocide, subverting America's elections and policy with bucketfuls of dark money, killing children and aid workers, and stealing homes and farms are hallmarks of a liberal democracy. If they are, then Israel is right on track. But somehow I think Israel is just about the polar opposite of what most of us understand a "liberal democracy" to be.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. Because Israel knows everything there is to know about a "thriving liberal democracy". /sarc
Many Iranians are already fans of Israel. Democracy is a process nothing more or less. It does not guarantee that any particular policy or outcome will prevail.
Unless, of course, genocide, subverting America's elections and policy with bucketfuls of dark money, killing children and aid workers, and stealing homes and farms are hallmarks of a liberal democracy. If they are, then Israel is right on track. But somehow I think Israel is just about the polar opposite of what most of us understand a "liberal democracy" to be.
LOL the US was attacked once and we invaded two countries one of which had absolutely nothing to do with the attacks leading to on order of a million direct deaths. A retaliatory 330x body count multiplier...not too shabby.
Can't even imagine what would happen in a world in which the Canadians or Mexicans lob rockets continuously into the US blowin
Re: (Score:3)
I don't "blame Israel for everything", I only blame them for the nasty immoral shit they do over and over and over again
It's clear to me that almost no country is blameless in any of this. Even my own Prime Minister chose not to condemn Israel when he had the perfect opportunity and the ears of the world were open to his words. Having said that, surely the US is chief among both the enablers and the beneficiaries of Israel's crimes against humanity.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't "blame Israel for everything", I only blame them for the nasty immoral shit they do over and over and over again
Yes you do. You blame Israel for responding to acts of war in which over a thousand civilians were intentionally targeted and massacred by a death cult whose self declared raison d'etre is explicitly and literally exterminating Jews because it is a necessary precondition for bringing about judgement day.
Hamas knew full well what would happen and the collateral damage civilians would be subjected to when Sinwar et el carried out his deliberate premeditated attacks on Israeli civilians yet they went ahead an
Re: (Score:2)
Iran would be even better than Israel. But nope. Leftists want to keep the ayatollahs in charge to own the Israelis. Can do anything that helps Isreal, even if it helps the entire world more and also frees tens of millions from oppression.
Thanks - you just gave the PERFECT illustration of the major problem with the practice which you imagine constitutes "thinking".
You see only black and white. In your world there are only good guys and bad guys, so when two bad guys oppose each other, the one you judge as less bad becomes the "good guy".
You totally ignore that the ground shifts. Now, I'd be happy to argue about which actor is more evil at any given moment or in any given conflict. But your mind seems incapable of navigating the complex terra
Re: (Score:2)
Cope harder MAGA troll - it might distract you from your seething.
Re: (Score:2)
The food in the fridge wasn't halal. Ayatollah no likey.
Re:Does Iran have a motive? (Score:4, Informative)
The relations between France and Iran had been execrable for some time. A year ago there was a "prisoner exchanges", when Mahdieh Esfandiari, an Iranian living in France and accused of "apology of terrorism" (incentivising of acts against Jews) was released in exchange of two French prisoners accused of spying in Iran, Cécile Kohler and Jacques Paris.
Iran and France have mutually summoned each other's ambassadors. France called Iran names ("disgraceful provocations") on Oct. 7:
At the request of M. Jean-Noël Barrot, Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs, the Ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Iran to France was summoned to the Quai d’Orsay today, in response to the disinformation campaign conducted by the Iranian authorities about the lycée [student] movement in France.
He was informed that the false content disseminated online by official accounts of the Iranian Foreign Ministry was absolutely unacceptable and that the summoning of our Ambassador in Tehran on 6 October was unfounded.
These disgraceful provocations must stop. https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr... [diplomatie.gouv.fr]
Also (and contrary to what the summary claims), France has said why they believe Iran is involved: the IPs of the attackers, and the language (farsi) apparently used in some chat channel that the attackers left behind.
Re:Does Iran have a motive? (Score:4, Interesting)
What would Iran gain from messing with France?
I'd think Mr. Putin would have more of a motive, since France (along with most of Europe) is supporting his opponent in Ukraine and he seems to be trying to probe their resolve by "accidentally" sending drones into their airspace from time to time.
I'm not pushing what I'm about to suggest, I merely offer it as a counterpoint: Iran could be "messing with France" on Putin's behalf, since Putin is sending drones and other military aid to Iran.
It could also be a warning to the States. The US has been unable to close the deal on taking Iran off the board; but the war has cost Iran a lot, so they may be unwilling to make the leap directly to cyberattacks on the US. Attacking France demonstrates the capability and might make the US think twice about further attacks on Iran. I know that one's a long shot - I'm just putting it out there to further the conversation.
Serious comment here (Score:5, Funny)
France has accused Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps of being behind last month's cyberattacks on fridges and freezers across the country.
It was a cold move by Iran that has a chilling impact on France. It may be time to unplug from the situation.
Re: (Score:2)
... by someone at least.
Can we trust them? (Score:5, Insightful)
Duh, It's Israel (Score:5, Interesting)
sad thing is, if France did prove it was Israel, they'd let Israel off with a stern warning.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, France has a long history of being kind to Jews.
Re: Duh, It's Israel (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Therefore let's blame the Jews? I think you skipped a step in your logic.
Re: Duh, It's Israel (Score:2)
Re: Duh, It's Israel (Score:2)
Nobody is blaming "the Jews" because Israel does not speak for all Jews.
Caspian Trap (Score:3)
France wants the US to enter its war against Russia directly so it's trying to merge the Ukraine and Iran conflicts.
Ukraine already attacked an Iran boat to curry favor but backed off when Iran threatened missile strikes.
El Cheeto is participating by saying 'he' will blockade Iranian commerce in the Caspian Sea.
US has no assets there but Ukraine has long range drones and Flamingo missiles.
"Iran melted our ice cream" is a freebie to the DC Warmongers' narrative.
It'll help Macron get the ECB job he wants.
It wasn't a hack! (Score:2)
Hack... No
Someone found a fridge control unit, ask copilot the default username and password and what port the admin interface is on. Then the just scanned the internet and found all the fridges connected to 4G modems with public IPs.
If there was any hacking, they scanned CGNATed networks.
Re: (Score:2)
Missed Opportunities for Headline (Score:2)
"Iran Has Zero Chill"
And so it starts (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
> Do it once and do it right or don't do it all.
Boots on the ground?
Re: (Score:1)