Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FBI, DHS, HHS Warn of Imminent Ransomware Threat Against U.S. Hospitals

krebsonsecurity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 357 posts

Re: FBI, DHS, HHS Warn of Imminent Ransomware Threat Against U.S. Hospitals

#291

Post by benlumen »

EQYV wrote: post #75

If this attack results in actual loss of life, I firmly believe the US should ensure that there are real-world physical consequences for these criminals. They cannot be described as anything less than the worst humanity has to offer. A failure to respond with meaningful and severe consequences for those responsible (assuming this is attack can be confidently attributed to a particular threat actor) opens the floodgat…

And if it’s from China?

This is going to be a controversial suggestion, but I have a feeling that we might already be in an asymmetric world war and our leaders might quietly know it. This year has felt like checkmate.

Re: FBI, DHS, HHS Warn of Imminent Ransomware Threat Against U.S. Hospitals

#292

Post by pmachinery »

titzer wrote: post #288
wrkronmiller wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is what terrorism looks like in 2020. Given the (extra-)legal powers that are activated by that word, I'd be circumspect in using it. Many crimes are "horrifying, terrifying, [and] disgusting" without rising to the level of terrorism.

Attacking a hospital is a war crime, so how is it not terrorism?

> Attacking a hospital is a war crime,

Strictly speaking, if people we don't like attack a hospital it's a war crime; if we do it, it's an accident.

> so how is it not terrorism?

Murdering civilians during a war is a war crime; that doesn't mean murder automatically equals terrorism outside of war.

Re: FBI, DHS, HHS Warn of Imminent Ransomware Threat Against U.S. Hospitals

#293

Post by Medicalidiot »

uhs-employee wrote: post #290
haswell wrote: post #8

This is not what we need in these final chapters of 2020 with COVID cases spiking. > Charles Carmakal, senior vice president for Mandiant, told Reuters that UNC1878 is one of most brazen, heartless, and disruptive threat actors he’s observed over the course of his career. This is what terrorism looks like in 2020. Horrifying, terrifying, disgusting.

The hospital chain I work for was hit with ransomware last month. Door locks, time clocks, and photocopy machines still worked, but all computers were down. We use paper records, but it was frustrating and inconvenient. We're not allowed to pay due to laws. Corporate started slowly building us a brand new, but terrible, network 5 weeks after the old one went down. Definitely caused a little staff burnout, but not mor…

We had our computers go down for ~12 hours one day. Paper charts came out, which was a massive undertaking. I could not imagine my system being down for 5 weeks.

Re: FBI, DHS, HHS Warn of Imminent Ransomware Threat Against U.S. Hospitals

#294

Post by nodelessness »

FractalParadigm wrote: post #232
nodelessness wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't justify someone abusing flawed systems to threaten people's lives. "Oh we brought it upon ourselves by making it easy to break in so we should fix that instead of going after the thieves?"

If the bad actors are halfway around the globe where they have zero jurisdiction, what can you reasonably expect US law enforcement to do? It's a bit like getting mad at police for not investigating your car getting broken into, because you left the windows cracked open.

9/11 also happened spectacularly in the middle of new york. Does that mean law enforcement tried to do something about Afghanistan? Was it the fault of airports to not do a thorough cavity search of each and every passenger?

Our life is to this day in many small ways runs on a contract that others are not trying to kill us. Security check or not.

Re: FBI, DHS, HHS Warn of Imminent Ransomware Threat Against U.S. Hospitals

#295

Post by JoeAltmaier »

pmachinery wrote: post #292
titzer wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Attacking a hospital is a war crime, so how is it not terrorism?

> Attacking a hospital is a war crime, Strictly speaking, if people we don't like attack a hospital it's a war crime; if we do it, it's an accident. > so how is it not terrorism? Murdering civilians during a war is a war crime; that doesn't mean murder automatically equals terrorism outside of war.

Come on. Blowing up a hospital is a crime, and arguably terrorism. Disabling the hospital and systematically preventing it from treating patients is a lesser thing. But still arguably terrorism if done intentionally.

And yes, it matters if an enemy or friend does it. That's so obvious to not merit discussion.

Re: FBI, DHS, HHS Warn of Imminent Ransomware Threat Against U.S. Hospitals

#296

Post by slimed »

benlumen wrote: post #291
EQYV wrote: post #75

If this attack results in actual loss of life, I firmly believe the US should ensure that there are real-world physical consequences for these criminals. They cannot be described as anything less than the worst humanity has to offer. A failure to respond with meaningful and severe consequences for those responsible (assuming this is attack can be confidently attributed to a particular threat actor) opens the floodgat…

And if it’s from China? This is going to be a controversial suggestion, but I have a feeling that we might already be in an asymmetric world war and our leaders might quietly know it. This year has felt like checkmate.

That is exactly how it feels.

Re: FBI, DHS, HHS Warn of Imminent Ransomware Threat Against U.S. Hospitals

#297

Post by sailfast »

tossmeout wrote: post #125
et2o wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Designed to destroy nuclear production facilities. Not terrorism.

What makes it not terrorism? Because the target was government-run facilities instead of civilians, or something else?

Assuming the conventional wisdom about the event is accurate:

A state military attacking a perceived threat to the national security of that state (while at the same time doing its damndest to make sure nobody knew about it) is pretty clearly outside the definition of terrorism. It fits squarely into espionage / warfare.

None of the terrorism boxes get ticked. It wasn't a splashy, overt thing meant to instill fear. It wasn't carried out against emotionally-charged targets attempting to incite, nobody claimed credit, etc.

Everything adverse that happens is not terrorism. The term has kinda worn itself out, which is bad, because that word invokes a whole bunch of executive power shifts.

Re: FBI, DHS, HHS Warn of Imminent Ransomware Threat Against U.S. Hospitals

#298

Post by NationalPark »

pmachinery wrote: post #292
titzer wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Attacking a hospital is a war crime, so how is it not terrorism?

> Attacking a hospital is a war crime, Strictly speaking, if people we don't like attack a hospital it's a war crime; if we do it, it's an accident. > so how is it not terrorism? Murdering civilians during a war is a war crime; that doesn't mean murder automatically equals terrorism outside of war.

This is the accident the commenter is referring to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunduz_hospital_airstrike

Note that Doctors Without Borders believes it was deliberate.

Re: FBI, DHS, HHS Warn of Imminent Ransomware Threat Against U.S. Hospitals

#299

Post by curryst »

bonestamp2 wrote: post #198
maaaaattttt wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fear of losing money is a real one. On the other hand, I believe that the word terrorism and the characterization of acts as terrorists should not be taken too lightly as it can lead to misuse of power rather quickly.

I wouldn't want to use the word lightly either, but if Russia is trying to destabilize our economy, for their own political gain, and they inadvertently threaten or kill many people in the process (by shutting down hospital information systems)... that is the textbook definition of terrorism.

Oh good, were all part of rogue terrorist nations then. Shall we talk about Vietnam or Korea? Or how about the use of "Strategic Bombing" in WWII, which was specifically designed to crumble cities by terrifying their citizens into leaving. That's not even to mention the use of nuclear weapons, which under this definition would probably make the US the worst terrorist organization in the world.

Perhaps an even closer corollary would be our embargo of Cuba, which effectively cut them off from having viable trading routes. We did it to destabilize their economy, so they would get rid of Communism because we don't like Communists. How many people have died of starvation because we're artificially dampening their economy?

Re: FBI, DHS, HHS Warn of Imminent Ransomware Threat Against U.S. Hospitals

#300

Post by sailfast »

Phlarp wrote: post #180
petre wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. It's cyber warfare. No civilians harmed, UF4 centrifuges disabled. I guess you can call it a surgical strike only without air to ground missiles?

It also acted as a starting gun for every other country on earth to create and/or massively expand their cyber warfare capabilities. Sparking a new arms race for the 21st century, normalizing acts of (cyber) aggression against foreign infrastructure during peacetime. Pandora's box

Maybe, but in this thread we're discussing whether Pandora was a terrorist. I think the answer is still no.
Post reply on HN