261–270 of 623 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, if it's more expensive to prevent the attack than to pay the ransom, what's the point? ;)
I think you're right - as I said on a sibling comment, if beans are all you count, and bean-counters rule the roost, you can write this off as a one-off, and point out you had 30 years without a ransomware, and therefore we don't need to do anything...
I am... flabbergasted. What? Ransomware has always been a brand of extortion; it's right there in the name. Extortion has become dangerous and toxic? You have got to be kidding me. I wonder what's next for these folks. A life of simple, honest, pleasant and non-toxic crime?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> “We are apolitical, we do not participate in geopolitics, do not need to tie us with a defined government and look for other our motives [sic],” reads an update to the DarkSide Leaks blog. “Our goal is to make money, and not creating problems for society. From today we introduce moderation and check each company that our partners want to encrypt to avoid social consequences in the future.”[1] [1] https://krebsonsec…
This is better then most rich businessman, actually. Many don't care if they create problems for society, if it means more money for them.
Nobody cares if you sabotage a random small business. Lots of people care when you attack a fuel pipeline. Attention is bad for this business.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that their coins were apparently easily stolen also debunks another favourite talking point of the crypto people that it secures your money from government access. Clearly, ways and means have been developed to do just that if necessary.
If you store your coins on a hard drive there's nothing the government can do to get them right? They would need your private key and your hard drive?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that their coins were apparently easily stolen also debunks another favourite talking point of the crypto people that it secures your money from government access. Clearly, ways and means have been developed to do just that if necessary.
If you store your coins on a hard drive there's nothing the government can do to get them right? They would need your private key and your hard drive?
It was a mistake to attack the business side of the oil company, because it created what could be sold as reasonable doubt to shut down the pipeline. As a result, the ransom had the optics of an attack on infrastructure. As evidenced by the coverage of Americans desperately filling up containers. This created the impetus for the US to treat this as an incident far and above the ambient ransomware activities leading u…
I got downvoted for saying that maybe it's time to treat serious ransomware attacks (infrastructure, security, health, etc.) as terrorism - as in the sense that they're a threat to the national security. But this kinda shows the response I was referencing to. A lot of people like to think of ransomware attacks as the ultimate stress test as far as security goes, and thus a good thing - but let's not get too blinded b…
Ransomware is non-state, not violent, and is done for economic, not political aims.
It was a mistake to attack the business side of the oil company, because it created what could be sold as reasonable doubt to shut down the pipeline. As a result, the ransom had the optics of an attack on infrastructure. As evidenced by the coverage of Americans desperately filling up containers. This created the impetus for the US to treat this as an incident far and above the ambient ransomware activities leading u…
I got downvoted for saying that maybe it's time to treat serious ransomware attacks (infrastructure, security, health, etc.) as terrorism - as in the sense that they're a threat to the national security. But this kinda shows the response I was referencing to. A lot of people like to think of ransomware attacks as the ultimate stress test as far as security goes, and thus a good thing - but let's not get too blinded b…
If serious ransomware attacks are being conducted by state actors with the sole intent of causing damage, and we want to use powerful terminologies to describe them, "acts of war" seems a reasonable start.
Yes, this is semantics--but some of my concern here is that just freely tossing around "terrorism" gives cover for organizations not to be diligent in at least attempting to secure their networks and digital assets.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So they have a public representative living in the US and are associated with Harvard University. I don‘t think there‘s much shadowy cybercrime to investigate there. How do you feel about Wikileaks and the prosecution of Julian Assange?
Having a "Harvard affiliation" doesn't legitimize illegal activities. Leaking private messages, passwords, and so on from social networks is an unacceptable breach of privacy. Exposing people's private donations is also unacceptable. This is a group looking to create a chilling effect on others' speech, particularly moderates and conservatives, through illegal cyber crimes. I am not sure how you can possibly see that…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you store your coins on a hard drive there's nothing the government can do to get them right? They would need your private key and your hard drive?
If you anger a sufficiently powerful nation-state, you should assume all options are on the table for recovering you, your hard drives, and your keys.