If ransomware spending must scale directly with ransomware attacks then I don't see how companies could possibly keep up with the spending. A lot of the "gaps" in cybersecurity are essentially spending problems. Companies want to spend as little on it as they can.
Ransomware Is Growing Three Times Faster Than the Spending Meant to Stop It
21–30 of 101 posts
Re: Ransomware Is Growing Three Times Faster Than the Spending Meant to Stop It
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think you can enforce such a rule. I think it's a good approach too. Another issue is that not paying up and risking restore from underfunded ops dept. might be more expensive than paying up AND making a selected executive look bad. And we can't have that, can we.
It would make the ransomware statistic go down without actually stopping crime. Any company that considers paying the ransom would have a strong incentive to never report the security incident to avoid being punished for ransom payments
Plus it gives the ransomware gangs a whole new angle they can use.
So, remember how you illegally paid us a ransom a few months ago? Unless you want to go to prison, then you better...
We're already seeing this against companies who pay ransoms and fail to report the breaches when they're legally required to - but it would be much worse if it's against individuals who are criminally liable.
Re: Ransomware Is Growing Three Times Faster Than the Spending Meant to Stop It
#23The idea that the spending needs to grow linearly with the growth is a damning indictment of the mindset of the vast ineffectual mess that is the cybersecurity industry.
Serious professionals use one or more spending models to determine budget.
My favorite is the Gordon-Loeb model[0], but there are others that are simpler and some that are more complex. Almost none that imply the budget should naively grow in lockstep with prevelence linearly.
I think TFA doesnt really mean to imply that it should, merely that there is a likley mismatch.
Re: Ransomware Is Growing Three Times Faster Than the Spending Meant to Stop It
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think you can enforce such a rule. I think it's a good approach too. Another issue is that not paying up and risking restore from underfunded ops dept. might be more expensive than paying up AND making a selected executive look bad. And we can't have that, can we.
Agreed - it’s not that it’s a bad point but it would be an ineffective rule which is usually an excuse to forgo other more effective (usually more expensive) options
Unfortunately the actual solution will probably have to mirror real world, which means balkanizing the Internet to clarify legal jurisdiction, maybe some international police task force to aid with cross-border investigation, but ultimately it all hinges on whether and how much the countries with most nuclear aircraft carriers are willing to pressure other countries to take this seriously.
Re: Ransomware Is Growing Three Times Faster Than the Spending Meant to Stop It
#25It seems obvious to me that the only real solution is to penalize the payment of ransoms. For the same reasons one doesn't negotiate with terrorists. Is there some reason to believe that this isn't the best approach? And if not, then any theories as to why it hasn't been enacted?
I work in the state government space. Many targets/victims of ransomware are small/local government agencies and the ransom demands are greater than their annual budgets. Not every agency is big enough to have someone (bored) come in on Sunday, notice stuff getting encrypted and then run in to the server room and hit the big red button like Virginia's legislature in 2021[0].
Many ransoms are far more than the victim can actually pay. Not all ransom payments result in a decryption key that actually works.
Notes:
0 - https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/officials-vir...
Re: Ransomware Is Growing Three Times Faster Than the Spending Meant to Stop It
#26If ransomware spending must scale directly with ransomware attacks then I don't see how companies could possibly keep up with the spending. A lot of the "gaps" in cybersecurity are essentially spending problems. Companies want to spend as little on it as they can.
[dead]
Re: Ransomware Is Growing Three Times Faster Than the Spending Meant to Stop It
#27Re: Ransomware Is Growing Three Times Faster Than the Spending Meant to Stop It
#28Stopping Ransomware is trivial if governments knew where the money goes. But cryptocurrencies and lax capital control pushed by the uber-rich makes it impossible.
The technology is there and it is used to track the average citizens every move. But when it comes to rich people then the money goes and comes without control (and without taxation).
Cryptocurrencies are a great solution to enable criminal activity. Their only use and highly appreciated by terrorists, criminals and dictatorial governments around the world.
Re: Ransomware Is Growing Three Times Faster Than the Spending Meant to Stop It
#29I don't think there is a reasonable correlation, since stopping ransomware doesn't require that much of an increase in spending; it's a culture thing more than a money thing.
What do you need to do to improve culture in the correct way?
Re: Ransomware Is Growing Three Times Faster Than the Spending Meant to Stop It
#30Thanks, Satoshi
Thanks, Tim Berners-Lee.