[cookiengineer]

I know, right? Rumors say it must have been a nation with incentives to conquer.

Jokes aside, I think that cyber warfare is the worst case scenario in terms of military efficiency, as it causes collateral civilian damage across the globe and its effects cannot be contained inside any borders.

And Toyota is a prime example of that. They ain't got nothing to do with the war, and were affected by it a bunch of times already.

[thfuran]

You think the effects would've been more localized if the manufacturer were bombed instead? Collateral damage affected civilians because the target was civilian, not because of the method of attack.

[OkayPhysicist]

On the contrary, look at Stuxnet: Infected well upwards of 200,000 computers, but only had any real adverse affect on 1: a Siemens Industrial controller controlling Iran's nuclear centrifuges. That's the kind of precision strike that would historically required covert operatives at immense risk.

[snovv_crash]

Maersk was hit much harder than Toyota, and arguably with much larger global consequences.

[me_me_me]

> as it causes collateral civilian damage across the globe and its effects cannot be contained inside any borders.

Again it does sound like a modus operandi of a particular country... so many coincidences