The article only mentions "a genuine stuxnet copy" (the Stuxnet "application") whereas the headline title mentions "source code to Stuxnet" which implies the C or assembler or code was used to create Stuxnet in the first place (which be an incredible find indeed).
The article seems rather ridiculous in any case. I recall an analysis of Stuxnet describing it as a conventional virus and it became visible specifically because like other viruses, it spread through a variety of systems.
Several posters elsewhere in the comments seem to think it's the source code.
Regardless, this is precisely the sort of headline that a fear slinging, technophobic, "series of tubes" politician will latch on to. Doubly so in this case, what with HBGary's political connections...
"... I recall an analysis of Stuxnet describing it as a conventional virus and it became visible specifically because like other viruses, it spread through a variety of systems. ..."
I read another open source report, NYT "Israeli Test on Worm Called Crucial in Iran Nuclear Delay" (Broad, Markoff & Sanger) ~ http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/world/middleeast/16stuxnet... detailing how Stuxnet was a very specifically designed piece of code targeted for the Siemens made controller called a "P.C.S.-7" and a configuration for specific number of machines. A tailored cyber attack, the work of a trained marksmen not a random shooter.
The article only mentions "a genuine stuxnet copy" (the Stuxnet "application") whereas the headline title mentions "source code to Stuxnet" which implies the C or assembler or code was used to create Stuxnet in the first place (which be an incredible find indeed).
The article seems rather ridiculous in any case. I recall an analysis of Stuxnet describing it as a conventional virus and it became visible specifically because like other viruses, it spread through a variety of systems.