Live data from Hacker News

US passes emergency waiver over fuel pipeline cyber-attack

bbc.com

1–10 of 479 posts

Re: US passes emergency waiver over fuel pipeline cyber-attack

#4
It needs to be asked again, why are critical services on the Internet ?

We all know why, companies are chasing profits at any cost, so hiring more people to monitor these systems as the did 40 years ago will lower the execs bonuses.

The US Gov should make it clear, if you are a critical service and if your service drops due to items being on the internet, for each occurances 10% of your total revenue (including your parent companies) are forfeited.

That will get them serious about security.

Re: US passes emergency waiver over fuel pipeline cyber-attack

#5
post #2

I like how they "guarantee support in case of problems" after you pay them. God forbid they lose a customer. Are they going for repeat buys?

They want to ensure ransoms are paid by there being lots of sources that say they do what they say. The kneejerk reaction is to be skeptical and waste time. The only reaction is to determine if you have a backup or not, or if the consequences are favorable or not. In all of the “or nots” then you pay and move on.

In the absence of consumer protection, word of mouth (or the compulsory google results) is key.

Re: US passes emergency waiver over fuel pipeline cyber-attack

#6
I like how they are charging 10% more if you pay with Bitcoin than with Monero.

I think commerce would greatly improve if other networks had Tor clients, especially because of the stablecoin and private stablecoin availability as of this year. All EVMs as well as Tendermint networks have no out of the box solutions for Tor nodes and connectivity. But they both have ways for ERC20 tokens to have a great degree of privacy. One Tendermint network called Secret Network has private smart contract execution, and a variety of bridges. So as all tokens are smart contracts the metadata and variables would not be visible onchain.

sDAI would be more useful for commerce if the nodes and wallets could easily resolve over Tor.

Is anybody working on that?

Re: US passes emergency waiver over fuel pipeline cyber-attack

#7
Something doesn't quite add up. I feel like we don't have the full story:

>After seizing the data, the hackers locked the data on some computers and servers, demanding a ransom on Friday. If it is not paid, they are threatening to leak it onto the internet.

So... that constitutes a state of emergency? What data would they have that would be so sensitive? More likely they have hooks deep into the operation of the pipeline and may be threatening to shut it down/destroy it if not paid. Or, rather, they may be having trouble restoring operations without paying the ransom.

Side note/speculation: Will the feds make a move against crypto?

Re: US passes emergency waiver over fuel pipeline cyber-attack

#9

Something doesn't quite add up. I feel like we don't have the full story: >After seizing the data, the hackers locked the data on some computers and servers, demanding a ransom on Friday. If it is not paid, they are threatening to leak it onto the internet. So... that constitutes a state of emergency? What data would they have that would be so sensitive? More likely they have hooks deep into the operation of the pipe…

As per the article:

> The emergency status enables fuel to be transported by road.

Re: US passes emergency waiver over fuel pipeline cyber-attack

#10
So, a very limited state of emergency which allows fuel that is ordinarily piped to be transported by truck.

Ancillarily, It's not evident this cyberattack actually compromised the industrial controls, but rather trashed the administrative system controlling the controls.

Post reply on HN