Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. to give ransomware hacks similar priority as terrorism, official says

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 591 posts

Re: U.S. to give ransomware hacks similar priority as terrorism, official says

#151

Post by chitowneats »

randomhodler84 wrote: post #122
vmception wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I laughed so hard without my mask that I almost got kicked out of this WeWork

Agree — These ban happy nocoiner rantings about outlawing math are funny if they weren’t so damn authoritarian.

We're not outlawing math. You can still run your little calculations on your machine. You just can't exchange them for dollars. That's what we're proposing here. Currency control.

Are you confusing this with the debate around encryption? That wouldn't surprise me coming from someone who uses the phrase "nocoiner".

Re: U.S. to give ransomware hacks similar priority as terrorism, official says

#152

Post by Kalium »

screamingninja wrote: post #138
Kalium wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's say you're a CEO at Big Pipeline Co. One day your phone rings. It's the NSA. They say your systems are vulnerable as hell. That you're very likely going to be breached in a quite expensive way very soon. It could shut down all the pipes on which Big Pipeline Co depends! They offer to patch your systems for you. Do you accept, knowing that your staff will have to hand over hundreds to thousands of credentials? K…

> They offer to patch your systems for you. That is certainly not how it works. See the links others posted for context. NSA is more likely to inform you of the vulnerabilities and associated mitigations.

I understand that's not how it works. I'm constructing a deliberately absurd example to show both how the NSA could help and why companies wouldn't accept it.

Re: U.S. to give ransomware hacks similar priority as terrorism, official says

#154

Post by mullingitover »

markhahn wrote: post #114

There's a huge difference: ransomware "attacks" are due to sloppy security by the victim. That's not the case for terrorism.

Ehh, you can have reasonable security and still be a terrorism victim, you can have reasonable security and still be a crypto-ransomware victim.

This is like tut-tutting arson victims for using wood in the construction of their buildings.

I'm okay with encouraging reasonable levels of security while also making life horrifically miserable for people engaged in criminal enterprises that attack those victims.

Re: U.S. to give ransomware hacks similar priority as terrorism, official says

#155

Post by selsta »

NtGuy25 wrote: post #133
reader_mode wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Difference is if corporations and funds can't hold bitcoin/crypto - you're back to $1/BTC. The whole value proposition of BTC hype bubble bursts if it's illegal in a major market like USA. Don't doubt some cyberpunk nuts will keep playing with it.

Monero is banned by nearly every US exchange, and hard to buy with USD as a US National. It still maintains value and has seen growth. While BTC may burst, it wouldn't go to $1/BTC. it would go to a small percentage of what it is now, but still retain some value.

Kraken lists Monero in US. Other US exchanges don't have Monero listed, but that does not mean that they "banned" it.

Re: U.S. to give ransomware hacks similar priority as terrorism, official says

#156

Post by virtue3 »

meetups323 wrote: post #77
axlee wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather not see taxpayers have to foot the bill for the profit of megacorps neglecting proper cybersecurity while sitting on mountains of tax-evaded offshore cash, thank you. The industry should be magnitudes larger than it is currently, and we shouldn't encourage corporate recklessness by socializing the costs.

If other States sent proper Armies over to attack critical infrastructure the US government would surely foot the bill to aid in security. Why should cyberarmies be treated more leaniently?

I think the threat of a tomahawk missile entering your building is a pretty good incentive to not fuck with US infrastructure but that's just me.

Re: U.S. to give ransomware hacks similar priority as terrorism, official says

#157

Post by JoshTko »

axlee wrote: post #45
chongli wrote: post #25

What about the other side of this? Instead of seeking backdoors and using them to spy on Americans, the NSA should be stepping up their game and securing vital infrastructure and domestic businesses against these attacks.

I'd rather not see taxpayers have to foot the bill for the profit of megacorps neglecting proper cybersecurity while sitting on mountains of tax-evaded offshore cash, thank you. The industry should be magnitudes larger than it is currently, and we shouldn't encourage corporate recklessness by socializing the costs.

You can't expect a regional coal plan to be ready for a nation state backed attack.

Re: U.S. to give ransomware hacks similar priority as terrorism, official says

#158

Post by xibalba »

coliveira wrote: post #136

So let's look at the chain of events: companies start to become monopolies, make billions of dollars that way. They become "too big too fail", important "infrastructure" for the US. Then, start to expose their user's data on public networks, and don't follow proper security procedures. Now, the public has to pay for the government to secure the magacorp networks! It's a non-stop scam, where they fail their (already s…

The Colonial Pipeline is a monopoly? It appears to be a joint venture between at least 5 energy companies. Or to what monopoly are you referring? There is not mention of any other companies in this article.

When hackers start to interfere with American food and energy supply chains, it rises to the level of national security, IMHO.

With all due respect, it seems like you might be jamming this story into a pre-chosen narrative.

Re: U.S. to give ransomware hacks similar priority as terrorism, official says

#159

Post by ineedasername »

axlee wrote: post #125
meetups323 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If other States sent proper Armies over to attack critical infrastructure the US government would surely foot the bill to aid in security. Why should cyberarmies be treated more leaniently?

Because proper cybersecurity should be treated as a cost of business, unlike the use of force which is an exclusive prerogative of the state. If large companies want the state to step in to absorb some of their costs, they should stop trying to avoid contributing to said state at every step of the way. If said public involvement came at the cost of partial ownership of companies requiring it, with complete disclosure…

That assumes all cyber threats can be averted by private corporations. It's difficult for a company to play effective defense against nation-state levels of cyber attack R&D. Yes, companies need better security than they have now, but they cant do it without help.

Re: U.S. to give ransomware hacks similar priority as terrorism, official says

#160

Post by ginja »

coliveira wrote: post #136

So let's look at the chain of events: companies start to become monopolies, make billions of dollars that way. They become "too big too fail", important "infrastructure" for the US. Then, start to expose their user's data on public networks, and don't follow proper security procedures. Now, the public has to pay for the government to secure the magacorp networks! It's a non-stop scam, where they fail their (already s…

I too dislike megacorps, but you could say the same thing about a business being robbed - they most likely could have done something to prevent it but police will still respond and not charge them for it.
Post reply on HN