The real take-away from this is that you have a _very_ competent cyber-actor (Iran) getting pancaked at will by an _extremely_ competent cyber-actor (Israel) in what one would presume to be one of it's most, _if not most_, cybersecure locations (Natanz).
Nation-states using cyber capabilities in this way, and the non-response it evokes, is reminiscent of how pre-WWI nation-states would conduct policy and international affairs with their armies.
It's something I wish the general public were more cognizant of. We need to openly talk about this type of power and conflict. Otherwise we're going to have another WWI-type moment, where it takes millions of people dying before we realize that the state of the game has changed because of new technologies.
Nation-states using cyber capabilities in this way, and the non-response it evokes, is reminiscent of how pre-WWI nation-states would conduct policy and international affairs with their armies.
It's something I wish the general public were more cognizant of. We need to openly talk about this type of power and conflict. Otherwise we're going to have another WWI-type moment, where it takes millions of people dying before we realize that the state of the game has changed because of new technologies.