Iran says it repelled 'extensive and complex' cyber attack
Iran repelled a large cyber attack on its infrastructure on Sunday, the head of its Telecommunication Infrastructure Company said. The incident happened a day after a powerful blast at the country's main port and a third round of nuclear talks with the US.
"One of the most widespread and complex cyber attacks against the country's infrastructure was identified and preventive measures were taken," Behzad Akbari said on Monday, according to the semi-official Tasnim news agency, without providing further details.
In recent years, Iran has faced a series of cyber attacks on critical infrastructure, including ports, as well as its nuclear sites. Tehran has typically blamed Israel for these incidents.
The incident was reported after at least 40 people were killed and more than 1,000 injured in an explosion at Bandar Abbas in southern Iran, home to the country's largest commercial port. Several containers exploded after what officials believed to be a fire at a chemical depot.
Chemicals at the port are thought to have fuelled the fires caused by the explosion, the exact cause of which remains unclear. The blast came as Iranian and US delegations held talks in Oman for high-level talks on Tehran's nuclear programme on Saturday, with both sides reporting progress.
While Iranian authorities so far appear to be treating the blast as an accident, it comes against the backdrop of years of shadow war with Israel. In 2021, a large cyber attack on Iranian petrol stations was blamed on Israel.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday repeated calls for Iran's entire nuclear infrastructure to be dismantled.
Israel has not ruled out attacking Iran's nuclear sites in the coming months, despite US President Donald Trump telling Mr Netanyahu that Washington was unwilling to support such an operation, Reuters reported this month.
In April and October last year, Iran attacked Israel with drones, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles after Israeli strikes killed Iranian generals and officials from Tehran's regional proxies.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
Ex-Israeli PM:Trump must tell Netanyahu 'enough is enough'
US President Donald Trump should tell Israel's leader Benjamin Netanyahu "enough is enough", a former Israeli prime minister told AFP, denouncing the continuation of the war on Gaza as a "crime" and insisting a two-state solution is the only way to end the conflict. Ehud Olmert, prime minister between 2006-2009, said in an interview in Paris that the United States has more influence on the Israeli government "than all the other powers put together" and that Trump can "make a difference". He said while the international community accepted Israel's right to self-defence after 7 October, this changed when Netanyahu spurned chances to end the war in March and instead ramped up operations. "If there is a war which is not going to save hostages, which cannot really eradicate more of what they did already against Hamas and if, as a result of this, soldiers are getting killed, hostages maybe get killed and innocent Palestinians are killed, then to my mind this is a crime," said Olmert. "And this is something that should be condemned and not accepted," he said.
Middle East Eye
10 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Trump says Iran's proposal 'unacceptable' as Tehran touts intel on Israeli nukes
Iran's response to a US nuclear deal proposal is 'unacceptable', President Donald Trump said on Monday, adding that Iran was 'asking for things you can't do'. 'They don't want to have to give up what they have to give up. They seek enrichment. We want just the opposite,' Trump said during a business round table. Earlier in the day, he spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump said the two leaders' conversation was mainly about Iran. 'So far, they (Iran) aren't there. I hate to say that…They have given us their thoughts on the deal, and I said, 'it's just not acceptable.'' Trump's pessimistic tone is in stark contrast to his assessment of the nuclear talks in May. He previously said he asked Netanyahu not to launch preemptive strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities because he believed the US was close to a 'solution'. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The US and Iran have held five rounds of talks since April to thrash out a new nuclear accord to replace the 2015 deal called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, which Trump unilaterally withdrew from during his first term in 2018. Trump, who prides himself on being a 'dealmaker', laughed about going toe-to-toe with the Iranians. His envoy, Steve Witkoff, met directly with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi during the talks, although the discussions were mediated by Oman. 'They (Iranians) are good negotiators, but they are tough. Sometimes they can be too tough. That's the problem,' Trump said. Trump said the next round of talks will take place on Thursday. Trump's comments come as all sides, the US, Iran and Israel, appear to be positioning themselves for different scenarios depending on how the talks progress. Iran touts Israel nuclear intelligence leak On Saturday, Iranian state media reported that Tehran had obtained a trove of "strategic and sensitive" Israeli intelligence in a covert operation, including files related to Israel's undeclared nuclear programme and defence plans. Israel is widely understood to have nuclear weapons, although it doesn't admit it. Iran's top security body said on Monday that, using intelligence it had obtained about Israeli nuclear facilities, Iranian forces could launch counterattacks - should Israel strike the Islamic Republic. Saudi Arabian and Omani officials propose nuclear facilities for Iran on Gulf island: Report Read More » Iran insists its nuclear programme is for civilian purposes. After Trump withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal, Iran ramped up uranium enrichment to 60 percent. US officials have said that Iran is weeks away from enriching uranium to the 90 percent level that would be needed for weaponisation. Iran would then have to construct a nuclear weapon, which could take months. Trump's comments on Monday suggest that he is pursuing a deal that would stop all Iranian enrichment - a red line for the Islamic Republic. Reports in Axios and The New York Times earlier this month said the White House may concede to a low level of enrichment by Iran, perhaps temporarily. The US provided Iran with a proposal for a nuclear deal on 31 May. On Monday, Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei criticised the US proposal as "lacking elements" reflective of the previous rounds of negotiations. "We will soon submit our own proposed plan to the other side through (mediator) Oman once it is finalised," Baqaei told a weekly press briefing. "It is a proposal that is reasonable, logical and balanced, and we strongly recommend that the American side value this opportunity.' Iran's parliament speaker has said the US proposal failed to include the lifting of sanctions, a key demand for Tehran, which has been reeling under their weight for years. Trump imposed debilitating sanctions on Iran in 2018. Is Trump holding back Israel from attacking? A steady stream of media leaks suggests that Israel is prepared to unilaterally bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, potentially alone. What is stopping Israel from bombing Iran's nuclear sites? Read More » One senior US official previously told Middle East Eye on the condition of anonymity that the Trump administration has been impressed by plans Israel shared with it that lay out unilateral strikes against Iran's nuclear programme without direct American involvement. The plans were discussed in April and May with CIA director John Ratcliffe. But analysts and former US and Israeli officials say Israel is unlikely to defy Trump's request to stand down. They say Netanyahu would like to share political responsibility with the US for attacking Iran if something goes wrong. He is also afraid Trump may not provide an American military backstop, given his recent ceasefire with the Houthis in Yemen that excluded Israel. In 2024, the US intervened directly to shoot down Iranian missiles and drones fired at Israel during two unprecedented direct exchanges of fire between the Middle East foes. Trump himself is under conflicting pressures. He has purged his administration of pro-Israel hawks like former national security advisor Mike Waltz and, more recently, lower-level officials like Merav Ceren, the National Security Council director for Israel and Iran. Ceren came in the crosshairs of pro-Trump "America First" commentators, but analysts say officials like her likely have little influence in a White House where Trump has consolidated decision-making down to all but his closest advisors. Iran has been the most active in positioning itself for the next round of talks.
Middle East Eye
10 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
What to know about the new Trump travel ban now in effect
US President Donald Trump's new travel ban went into effect on Monday, to far less mobilisation and criticism than the first time around, in 2017. With a bigger mandate this time, and relatively high approval ratings for his immigration policy, Trump's new travel ban has not just expanded, it's also on far more solid legal footing, immigration lawyers told Middle East Eye. The executive order targets 12 countries: Afghanistan; Burma; Chad; the Republic of the Congo; Equatorial Guinea; Eritrea; Haiti; Iran; Libya; Somalia; Sudan; and Yemen. Additionally, nationals from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela will be partially restricted. Those already inside the US are exempt. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters For those abroad at the time the ban went into effect, they may enter the country if they are green card holders, preauthorised visa holders, preauthorised refugee claimants, dual citizens where one of the countries is not included in the travel ban, or if they are the immediate family members of a US citizen. Still, increased scrutiny at ports of entry and orders from Secretary of State Marco Rubio could lead to visa revocations by a border agent. The administration has made it clear that no person is entitled to entry into the US, apart from US citizens. The White House said the ban, as well as heightened vetting measures, is necessary because of excessive visa overstays, which the Trump administration says is a national security concern because it could lead to "terrorist" activity. 'We don't want them': countries facing travel ban to US Read More » The ban was initially expected back in March, but was only introduced following an attack by an Egyptian national on a pro-Israeli march in Colorado last week. "This is definitely a Muslim ban couched in language that the Trump administration knows how to get around as it pertains to the courts," Haris Tarin, the vice president of policy and programming at the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), told MEE. "There was a lot of online chatter - especially by the Laura Loomers and the Randy Fines - these intense Islamophobes in Congress and supporters of the administration who basically said Muslims are responsible for this, and that they needed to ban the Muslim Brotherhood and that they needed to have travel bans," he added. The administration "already spooked so many people from coming into this country... with the detention of students, with the detention of tourists," Tarin said. "This was the perfect time to go even further." 'Anxious, desperate, exhausted' Unlike the 2017 ban, this one is likely to remain in effect in its current form, Hassan M Ahmed, managing attorney at the HMA Law Firm, told MEE. "It's clear that a lot more thought went into this version of it. It seems that they learned their lessons from the previous iterations," Ahmed said, referring to the persistent challenges they faced in court. In a precedent-setting decision in late 2017, the US Supreme Court maintained that the president did not violate the First Amendment with his so-called Muslim Ban, and was well within his rights to determine what is in the national security interest. The Court also said there was no anti-Muslim animus in the ban, simply because many other Muslim countries were not targeted. "Anytime a policy changes, whether for good or for bad, we get an increase in phone calls," Ahmed said. "In this case, we're dealing not just with a change in policy, but there's sort of a psychological aspect to a lot of the administration's offensive policies, and that creates a great deal of uncertainty." On those phone calls are people who are "anxious, desperate, and exhausted", Ahmed told MEE. "Unfortunately, given the track record of open defiance of court orders and lawlessness that's become sort of emblematic of this administration, sometimes we as lawyers are at a loss [and unable] to tell clients that they don't have anything to worry about." Laila Ayub, an immigration attorney and co-founder of Project ANAR, which assists in the resettlement of Afghan refugees, said the climate of fear is deeply pervasive among the community she works with. "Everyone who's already here started contacting us, thinking they're now at risk of deportation just because of their nationality, which is not actually the reality," Ayub told MEE. "So there is a lot of opportunity still to empower people with information about their rights." "The number one question, though, that people have always despite their situation when they are in here in the US, is when they can reunite with their family. That is really something that will be impacted by the travel ban." Impact on visas While advocacy groups have been pleading with the Trump administration for months to make an exemption for Special Immigrant Visas for Afghans who aided American soldiers between 2001 and 2021, there is such a carveout. Still, the visa does not include everyone who worked for or who worked closely with the US during their presence in Afghanistan, Ayub said. Mirriam Sediq, who runs Seddiq Law Maryland, told MEE that previously "lawful categories for Afghans" now suddenly no longer exist. "There are people that came to the US in 2021, 2022 through humanitarian parole. There are also those who have [Temporary Protected Status]. And TPS has been ended for Afghans, so they're really left in a completely no man's land right now." Handful of US lawmakers demand Trump ban the Muslim Brotherhood Read More » Seddiq said she feels "super betrayed by this idea that we've told our clients to do [the right] things" in terms of entering legally and maintaining a law-abiding presence, yet "they're walking directly into the lion's den when they do it". Among other actions, the Trump administration has sent Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to courthouses around the country to arrest largely undocumented immigrants who are appearing for their immigration court date, just as the government asked them to. This, Seddiq said, was always standard practice: as long as an immigrant did regular check-ins with ICE agents and showed up in front of a judge and violated no laws, they could carry on with their lives in the US. Now, they're being taken away from their US-born children to be detained and then deported. "We've allowed people to enter even when they don't have a pathway forward. And this is where we are," Seddiq told MEE. "But we've been here for decades and decades and decades, and we've asked for major immigration reform, major overhauls, maybe even some sort of amnesty for people who are doing all the right things. And there's never the political will to do it." Legislative change Despite a much more muted societal reaction compared to 2017, civil liberties groups and immigrant advocacy organisations are working on ways to respond to the new Trump travel ban. The public that took to the streets eight years ago is simply too exhausted this time, Tarin told MEE. "People have been responding to students being kidnapped off the streets by ICE. People have been mobilising to try to support students on student visas. Lawyers have tried to mobilise around protecting students on college campuses," he said. But that's also a strategy the administration has employed. "The way advocates organise is they take one issue at a time and they organise around it, and that's how they're successful. And so if you throw 15 issues at them, they won't be able to respond," Tarin said. In the immediate term, MPAC is putting together a network of lawyers that can be accessed in case of emergencies where otherwise legal entrants to the US are stuck at airports or put into detention. However, the group is also eyeing the 2026 midterm elections, when members of the House and Senate will be up for reelection, and Democrats may stand a chance of gaining a majority of seats in both chambers. MPAC is pushing for traction on the NO BAN Act so that if Democrats take control of Congress, there is an opportunity to make the bill a law. The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives in February by Democratic Congresswoman Judy Chu of California. It aims to limit Trump's authority to ban an entire class of foreigners - or "aliens" as they are called in the US - from arriving in the country, and demands that Rubio provide lawmakers with reports on the number of denied visitors. For the time being, people will "always try" to come to the US anyway, Seddiq said. "I am loath to tell anybody that the United States is closed the way the administration wants to seemingly advertise to the world. I think that where there's a will, there's a way, and frequently, when you're dealing with immigration, the key to success is merely standing up one more time when you're knocked down," Ahmed said.
