53 pointsby newspaper13 hours ago15 comments
  • bawolff3 hours ago
    It is election season in Israel right now, i cant help but wonder if there is some sort of internal politics going on with the article.

    The article seems careful to say "manipulated equipment", which sounds more like snowden style eavesdropping devices than bombs. That would be more believable to me, as sneaking exploding devices into countries they are not at war with seems implausibly diplomatically stupid. It also mostly worked for hezbollah because they were a non state group that didnt have the budget to do supply chain security. I could see targeted spy devices being plausible, but hezbollah style exploding pagers doesnt seem all that plausible or even desirable against real countries.

    Consider me doubtful.

    If it was really true, i'm pretty sure they would STFU about it.

    • sheikhnbake3 hours ago
      Considering implausibly diplomatically stupid things Israel has done historically, I don't find this that far fetched. Particularly when they are very willing to act antagonistically towards an ally like the United States both publicly and privately.
      • bawolffan hour ago
        I dont think they have done anything remotely comparablely stupid. I think a lot of people don't like Israel and that colours their assesment on how rational they view Israel's actions.

        As far as USA goes - countries dont have friends they have shared interests. They are allies because their interests largely align, but they are very far away from perfectly aligning. I think people believe the propaganda that Israel is a vassal of USA too much - that isn't the case; Israel has more than enough power to plot their own foreign policy and they dont hesitate to do so when it suits their interests, just like any other country does when they have the ability.

      • rainworld3 hours ago
        The “I” stands for impunity.
      • whoanoway3 hours ago
        [dead]
  • OhMeadhbh3 hours ago
    Maybe we could do a survey of old mobile phones and pagers to see how many of them have explosives in them. I never thought of myself as a terrorist but if one of my phones wound up with a small bit of C4 in it, that would be a finding.
    • megous3 hours ago
      They likely mean manipulated equipment for purposes of spying. It follows from the context further in the article when he's talking about Gaza.

      Ever wondered how much Israel uses their 8200 alumni it has embedded in all major tech corporations? Maybe this is part of it. Embedding backdoors, and plausibly deniable bugs, or giving access directly, exfiltrating data, whatever.

    • pixl973 hours ago
      My question is how this isn't detectable, especially if people are moving them past things like airports?
      • hypfer3 hours ago
        It avoids detection by being hypothetical and imaginary, meaning that it exists purely on the meta layer where the scanners cannot reach.
        • docdeek2 hours ago
          More than 40 dead bodies in Lebanon would suggest the capacity described is far from hypothetical.
      • bawolffan hour ago
        most likely because the headline is false.

        For the hezbollah attack, it wasnt detectable because they used a very small amount and they used PTEN which is harder to detect than other explosives. Even still there is a lot of speculation online that they might have detonated earlier than planned due to being discovered

      • sybercecurity2 hours ago
        I would guess the people targeted with these devices do not travel a lot via commercial airlines. Or at least do not carry phones that can be confiscated and scanned.
  • oldsklgdfth3 hours ago
    If they have this sort of ability, can they supply chain attach to add headphone jacks back into smartphone?
    • oldsklgdfth3 hours ago
      "Have you ever bought a produce that was almost perfect except for a couple of feature they never make. This is a solution for you. With our SCAAAS you can customize your product after the fact."

      Supply Chain attack as a service.

      • OhMeadhbh2 hours ago
        Maybe ODMs can monetize this service. Pay me X amount for the part or X + Y amount to ensure some third-party didn't embed a back door or explosive in your part.
        • oldsklgdfth2 hours ago
          "Would you like a smart tv that doesn't spy on you? Too bad that doesn't exist. But for the low rate of $19.95 we will rip all that out with our patented SCAAAS. No surveillance or your money back. Surveillance for our observability may be present. Terms may apply"
    • InsideOutSanta3 hours ago
      If you can make a headphone jack out of trinitrotoluene, you can probably convince them to add it to every smartphone sold.
  • hypfer3 hours ago
    Not implausible, but also not implausible to lie there.

    Why wouldn't you claim that you have this kind of capability? It only is beneficial to you especially when you're Mossad.

    It is a very weird thing to say though, given that the pagers targeted a very specific group doing very specific things with very specific processes using very specific tools (the pagers).

    The logistics of that don't check out. That's not something that just lurks "everywhere".

    So Devices "like" the pagers.. what does that mean?

    I suppose cyber implants (for the lack of a better word) would be plausible, but also stretching the whole "like" comparison.

    Yes, these agencies have implants in tech. All of them do. Where's the news?

    • megous3 hours ago
      Smartphones are everywhere, and Israeli spyware is well known, some companies producing it are even banned in US. Not in EU though, for whatever reason. (one probably being, some governments are/were using it against opponents, like in Poland, Hungary or Greece)
  • skeledrew2 hours ago
    Are governments yanking apart or x-raying all devices anywhere remotely close to them yet?

    I find this pretty strange, as the last thing an intelligence officer would do is go public about their work, even if they're retired or even defected. This is like a really early or really late April Fools.

  • labrador3 hours ago
    Big deal. I could put bombs in things to kill people but I'm not a murderous person.
  • lykahb3 hours ago
    This looks like fake news. If there is a large number of such devices, they'd be discovered by the airport screening soon.
    • relayhacker3 hours ago
      The nuance is important. The title misquotes him. What he actually says is "In every country you can imagine" which is subtle but reads to me like "We've used this tactic everywhere we have conflict" and not what the title suggests which is "We have these in England, France, Russia, Australia..."
    • 2 hours ago
      undefined
  • amai2 hours ago
    I hope they let the ones in Kremlin, Russia explode soon.
  • throw3108223 hours ago
    Not sure how reliable is this guy- and I don't think at all that he is referring literally to explosive devices, but just to long-running intelligence and spying operations with sophisticated logistics.

    Anyway consider this. If you were Israel, where would you put more effort in:

    1) fighting off a militia that is in no case a match for a country armed with F35s and nuclear weapons;

    2) keep benefiting from the "unwavering" support of the West (and, by a lesser extent, the flow of money from the US)- which both grants you a state-of-the-art army and weapons, and a full diplomatic cover and support in any circumstance, from the most important actors in the world.

    Now consider the amount of effort and ingenuity they put in 1), and infer the amount of effort and ingenuity they must be putting in 2).

  • 3 hours ago
    undefined
  • archerx3 hours ago
    How is this not terrorism if true?
    • beambot3 hours ago
      Terrorism is in the eye of the beholder -- usually the aggrieved party. Hence the saying, "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter"
      • ars3 hours ago
        Terrorism is attacking civilians on purpose.
        • danbruc3 hours ago
          I have been wondering for some time if terrorism is considered acceptable in certain situations? In a David vs Goliath situation where there is no realistic chance of stopping or defeating a more powerful aggressor, would it be considered acceptable to use non-conventional means and terrorism? Or is the weaker victim expected to play by the rules of warfare and accept its eventual defeat?
          • newspaper12 hours ago
            Some of what gets labeled as "terrorism" is very legitimate resistance. For instance, there's little difference between the Haitian Slave Revolt, the Pueblo Revolt, the Warsaw Rebellion and the Al Asqa Flood (Oct 7th). Yet only the latter is labeled as "terrorism". Repressed people or people forced off their land always have the right to armed resistance. It's also debatable if anyone living on stolen land can be considered a "civilian".
    • OhMeadhbh3 hours ago
      There's probably an argument that it's okay when states do objectionable things. Certainly there are large portions of the population that are opposed to actions their states take on their behalf? What's the difference between the US bombing an Iranian pre-school and ISIS decapitating journalists? Mostly that one is sanctioned by a powerful state and the other is not.
    • InsideOutSanta3 hours ago
      It's quite literally terrorism. Telling people "we can blow people up anywhere in the world" is intended to make people afraid. It's deliberately creating a climate of fear. That's what terrorism is.
    • impossiblefork3 hours ago
      If it targets combatants, it isn't terrorism.

      If it targets others, it is. Some countries have ideas like that only non-state entities can commit terrorism, but that is nonsense. My own country's laws don't distinguish between state and non-state acts in its terrorism legislation, for example.

      • newspaper13 hours ago
        Putting bombs in consumer devices and releasing them into the public is always going to be terrorism.
        • skeledrew2 hours ago
          Only if they go boom. Or they're discovered and publicized. Otherwise there is no terror, and so not "terrorism".
          • newspaper1an hour ago
            Yes, distributing explosives into the public is terrorism, regardless of if they're discovered or not. I'll add that this mossad agent is also, by definition, engaging in terrorism since he's trying to cause mass fear that they've distributed explosives worldwide.
    • soulofmischief3 hours ago
      Because we don't write the history books others use to teach our children.
    • ktallett3 hours ago
      Suggesting a country committing acts of terrorism are terrorists, seems to escape many.
    • ars3 hours ago
      "it was implemented across “virtually every potential theatre of operation.”"

      War is not terrorism.

    • pixl973 hours ago
      "You're only terrorists if you're on the losing side"
  • recursivedoubtsan hour ago
    Daily reminder that President Trump was given a golden pager:

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/pms-office-confirms-netanyahu-...

  • sparrish3 hours ago
    This is more likely to be disinformation than it is to be true.

    After the 'exploding pagers', every government was inspecting and scanning their devices.

    It's in Mossad's favor to keep everyone second-guessing.

  • 3 hours ago
    undefined
  • bradleykingz3 hours ago
    [flagged]