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

Post by Maxious » Wed, Nov 01, 2023, 5:39 AM UTC

wdr1 wrote: post #142

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…

Chris Voss, a former FBI hostage negotiator, discussed this policy on Lex Friedman's podcast. Here's the clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gm4hb5yNxyE The policy has been widely misreported as "we don't negotiate with terrorists", which is wrong. The actual policy is we won't make concessions to terrorists.

Post by toyg » Wed, Nov 01, 2023, 6:24 AM UTC

sgjohnson wrote: post #147

Analemma_ wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have fun being the DA who presses charges against a mother of three who paid so their kids could see daddy again instead of watching him get beheaded by terrorists. It's sounds nice in the abstract; in practice it's political suicide.

> It's sounds nice in the abstract; in practice it's political suicide. Depends on how you spin it. I suspect it would be quite easy to spin the narrative on this one. "So you knowingly funded a terrorist group that's likely going to use the money to commit further crimes against US citizens?" or something of the sort. Have some experts testify on that too, preferably ones in officers uniform.

Post by jdietrich » Wed, Nov 01, 2023, 6:48 AM UTC

nitwit005 wrote: post #137

Mistletoe wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish my health provider had paid the ransom. They screwed up and got hacked and wouldn’t or couldn’t pay the ransom, now the entire clinic has no health records for their patients. My doctor can’t see any health info older than a few years. I couldn’t believe what she was telling me.

The randsomware seems like a side issue. Evidently, your health provider doesn't care that much about your health records. Even ignoring security issues, they had no reliable backup. A fire would have produced this result.

Post by ozfive » Wed, Nov 01, 2023, 8:19 AM UTC

gnfargbl wrote: post #93

DavidPeiffer wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>...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 -…

Post by PeterisP » Wed, Nov 01, 2023, 10:59 AM UTC

nitwit005 wrote: post #137

Mistletoe wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish my health provider had paid the ransom. They screwed up and got hacked and wouldn’t or couldn’t pay the ransom, now the entire clinic has no health records for their patients. My doctor can’t see any health info older than a few years. I couldn’t believe what she was telling me.

The randsomware seems like a side issue. Evidently, your health provider doesn't care that much about your health records. Even ignoring security issues, they had no reliable backup. A fire would have produced this result.