DarkSide ransomware gang quits after servers, Bitcoin stash seized

Post by Ericson2314 » Fri, May 14, 2021, 10:55 PM UTC

TrackerFF wrote: post #202

bredren wrote: post #45

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…

Post by Applejinx » Fri, May 14, 2021, 11:04 PM UTC

throwaway316943 wrote: post #97

geofft wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the question is, how come an attack on a hospital does not have the optics of an attack on infrastructure? (It almost seems oil does not require infrastructure - you can, theoretically, prep for an oil infrastructure outage by storing it containers, same as you do with water and food. But you can't really prep for a medical infrastructure outage. Is it just that, as a result, there were no photos of people ho…

Destroying logistic infrastructure is how you defeat a country. Petroleum is critical to the functioning of modern economies, if you cut that off things go badly. They really kicked the hornets nest on this one.

Post by EamonnMR » Fri, May 14, 2021, 11:08 PM UTC

TrackerFF wrote: post #202

bredren wrote: post #45

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…

Post by suifbwish » Fri, May 14, 2021, 11:14 PM UTC

EamonnMR wrote: post #485

TrackerFF wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

No imagination required; this cyberattack on infrastructure masqueraded as ransomware: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petya_(malware)

Post by vkou » Fri, May 14, 2021, 11:22 PM UTC

fencepost wrote: post #380

vkou wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Terrorism is a non-state use of violence for political aims. Ransomware is non-state, not violent, and is done for economic, not political aims.

Ransomware is non-state Are there no ransomware operations linked to North Korea? I was under the impression that there was some level of activity there to maintain supplies of globally-usable currency.