Why Flame can't be the world's most complex malware

30.05.2012
The most remarkable thing about the is that it's dominating global news. Not that Flame isn't newsworthy. Most people are still unaware of the scope and scale of online espionage. It's new to the audience, therefore it is news. But why now? Let's put Flame into perspective.

Flame can take over computers, log keystrokes and mouse movements, record screenshots, turn on cameras and microphones without turning on red lights, copy and exfiltrate data to its masters -- but so can any number of $200 criminal malware kits.

Flame is modular -- but so is any good software.

There's a few new-sounding tricks involving Bluetooth and the like -- but again that's surely evolutionary rather than revolutionary.

Until now, the reference point for complex malware -- at least in public -- has been , the worm that supposedly sabotaged Iran's uranium enrichment program in 2009 and 2010.

Stuxnet probably cost just a few million dollars to produce, according to Patrick Gray, presenter of the Risky Business security podcast.