Alliance of 40 countries to vow not to pay ransom to cybercriminals, US says • Hacker News Board

Re: Alliance of 40 countries to vow not to pay ransom to cybercriminals, US says

#91

Post by guerrilla » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 5:09 PM UTC

Spivak wrote: post #85

rnk wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should have pointed out that her view is self-serving. if you are a hostage negotiator (retired even or whatever), it's natural to argue that we will still negotiate with terrorists. Just like programmers argue about whether we'll still have a job even as ai gets better and better ;-)

I mean "people still keep hiring me, even people who have a policy of not negotiating" is a pretty neutral take.

Umm, no. A well-known sales technique is inflating your own demand. There's no way to know whether she's telling the truth or doing that.

Re: Alliance of 40 countries to vow not to pay ransom to cybercriminals, US says

#92

Post by arbuge » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 5:11 PM UTC

ooterness wrote: post #31

The HN title matches the article headline, but the article headline is horribly inaccurate. This is not about making ransom payments illegal, as many commenters have assumed. They are setting up an international information-sharing system to help track cryptocurrency wallets that are receiving ransom payments.

Indeed. "take steps to try to end" would have been more accurate.

Re: Alliance of 40 countries to vow not to pay ransom to cybercriminals, US says

#93

Post by gnfargbl » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 5:11 PM UTC

DavidPeiffer wrote: post #33

varjag wrote: post #14

So there's that woman I follow who used to work in hostage and ransom negotiation business, and she's adamant there's no such thing as "no negotiations with terrorists" no matter public rhetoric or legislation. When push comes to shove, side channels and loopholes are inevitably found and third party contractors like her are getting hired. I strongly suspect this too will end up mostly a jurisdiction/accounting nuanc…

>...there's no such thing as "no negotiations with terrorists" no matter public rhetoric or legislation. I've heard this as well. A professor was flying into a less than stable area or Afghanistan and for some reason they were descending just like a normal commercial flight. "What are you doing, we're going to get shot down!". He was used to a steep descent or a spiral to the runway to minimize the risk of getting hi…

You have to wonder how much of that transaction is saving face? The warlord doesn't have to deal with the messy business of trying to shoot down jets belonging to a well-funded army; the military doesn't have to deal with the difficult business of engaging a warlord with local connections and support. Both sides get to wink and imply that they each got the better end of a "business deal". It's Clausewitz in reverse -- commerce as a de-escalation of war by other means.

Re: Alliance of 40 countries to vow not to pay ransom to cybercriminals, US says

#94

Post by digging » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 5:11 PM UTC

qup wrote: post #82

digging wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or instead of banding together to not pay, organizations/nations could pool money to help poorer hospitals pay. Maybe that, too, would make the rich think more about global security.

So some asshat will be in charge of IT at [poor hospital], some rich people will foot the bill, and somehow that will improve...what? What is "global security?"

Oh, I forgot the poor are meant to suffer.

Global security meaning: Perhaps, if the rich found that the cost of supporting poor hospitals was high, they'd determine that they would prefer to invest in cybersecurity in poor hospitals. (Not likely, considering how few wealthy organizations care about cybersecurity in their own organizations.)

Re: Alliance of 40 countries to vow not to pay ransom to cybercriminals, US says

#95

Post by arbuge » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 5:12 PM UTC

varjag wrote: post #14

So there's that woman I follow who used to work in hostage and ransom negotiation business, and she's adamant there's no such thing as "no negotiations with terrorists" no matter public rhetoric or legislation. When push comes to shove, side channels and loopholes are inevitably found and third party contractors like her are getting hired. I strongly suspect this too will end up mostly a jurisdiction/accounting nuanc…

I suspect if this coalition of nations actually criminalized paying ransoms, that would go a long way towards closing up all those loopholes. Perhaps that is what needs to happen next.

Re: Alliance of 40 countries to vow not to pay ransom to cybercriminals, US says

#96

Post by JumpCrisscross » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 5:13 PM UTC

varjag wrote: post #90

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> took what, over two decades to convince Switzerland and Austria to get on board for (part of) money laundering treaties Yet they still complied with U.S. sanctions. (Or were arrested abroad for defying them.) You seem to misunderstand that sanctions are not a treaty obligation. If your country deals with a sanctioned entity, it gets sanctioned as well. That enforces compliance indirectly. America and and does unila…

Thanks, it's great to know that money laundering is a solved problem.

> it's great to know that money laundering is a solved problem

We don’t sanction money launderers generally. And no, terrorism finance isn’t a solved problem either. Hence why I said one would need to keep company with that category of people were such a measure enacted. But again, your K&R retiree cum schoolteacher was describing a political constraint. Not a functional one.

Re: Alliance of 40 countries to vow not to pay ransom to cybercriminals, US says

#97

Post by kube-system » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 5:13 PM UTC

MichaelZuo wrote: post #3

It's unclear who in the USG is actually responsible for enforcing this, especially against those organizations that do send payments anyways.

Any executive action on this would be via sanctions, I presume.

Re: Alliance of 40 countries to vow not to pay ransom to cybercriminals, US says

#98

Post by varjag » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 5:15 PM UTC

guerrilla wrote: post #91

Spivak wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean "people still keep hiring me, even people who have a policy of not negotiating" is a pretty neutral take.

Umm, no. A well-known sales technique is inflating your own demand. There's no way to know whether she's telling the truth or doing that.

Inflating what, sorry? Unless you have someone who's been kidnapped you're hardly in the market.

Re: Alliance of 40 countries to vow not to pay ransom to cybercriminals, US says

#99

Post by willcipriano » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 5:15 PM UTC

> The members of the International Counter Ransomware Initiative (CRI)— Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Dominican Republic, Estonia, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Lithuania, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Poland, Republic of Korea, Romania, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, and Ukraine, and the European Union..

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases...

Re: Alliance of 40 countries to vow not to pay ransom to cybercriminals, US says

#100

Post by kube-system » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 5:15 PM UTC

diego_moita wrote: post #45

Sorry for my cynicism but it seems that any cryptocurrency that is able to solve the traceability problem has now one more business opportunity.

Previous statements by the white house on this indicates they intend to implement KYC requirements.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases...