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

Update on IT Security Incident at UCSF

ucsf.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 150 posts

Re: Update on IT Security Incident at UCSF

#61

Post by rkho »

redditmigrant wrote: post #54
rkho wrote: post #13

As a reminder, in 2017 UCSF offshored all of its IT staff to HCL Technologies and forced their then-employees to train their replacements before laying them off. They brought the replacements into the Bay Area on H1B temporarily while they were trained by their soon-to-be-laid-off counterparts and then sent back overseas to continue their roles once training was complete. https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/02/28/…

It's tiring to keep hearing these stories and tieing them to H1B. Satya Nadella also started on an H1B, Sundar Pichai did too and so did Andrew Ng. Just those 3 combined have created more jobs than were lost here. So please, stop spreading partial info that creates hate against a whole swathe of people who have come here legally, have contributed extremely productively to this nation in the form of taxes and labor, a…

I find it difficult to believe that we read the same article.

Based on the specifics of my comment and the context of the article at hand, I don't understand how your point ties to my comment and do not appreciate the insinuation it brings.

Re: Update on IT Security Incident at UCSF

#62

Post by ed25519FUUU »

> The data that was encrypted is important to some of the academic work we pursue as a university serving the public good. We therefore made the difficult decision to pay some portion of the ransom, approximately $1.14 million

Once you’ve paid the Danegeld, you’ll never get rid of the Dane.

Re: Update on IT Security Incident at UCSF

#63

Post by ed25519FUUU »

ahi wrote: post #35
rkho wrote: post #13

As a reminder, in 2017 UCSF offshored all of its IT staff to HCL Technologies and forced their then-employees to train their replacements before laying them off. They brought the replacements into the Bay Area on H1B temporarily while they were trained by their soon-to-be-laid-off counterparts and then sent back overseas to continue their roles once training was complete. https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/02/28/…

How the heck did they qualify for H1Bs when they were replacing already employed Americans? Not only did the H1Bs unemploy citizens, we didn't even get the long term benefits of trained workers living and paying taxes in the States.

The H1B system is totally out of wack. One of the many things that we need to tear down and rebuild from scratch in 2020.

Re: Update on IT Security Incident at UCSF

#64

Post by malux85 »

seesawtron wrote: post #46
ahi wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How the heck did they qualify for H1Bs when they were replacing already employed Americans? Not only did the H1Bs unemploy citizens, we didn't even get the long term benefits of trained workers living and paying taxes in the States.

but they did get the benefit of cheaper IT workforce? What they did to their existing employees was certainly morally wrong but is outsourcing your IT support to cheaper third party seen as morally wrong too? Isn't that the idea of free captial market? Sure the state didn't get taxes from those employees but state owned university saved costs.

They did benefit from the cheaper workforce, in fact they saved 1.14 million dollars!

Wait

Oh no...

Re: Update on IT Security Incident at UCSF

#65

Post by scottwb »

rkho wrote: post #13

As a reminder, in 2017 UCSF offshored all of its IT staff to HCL Technologies and forced their then-employees to train their replacements before laying them off. They brought the replacements into the Bay Area on H1B temporarily while they were trained by their soon-to-be-laid-off counterparts and then sent back overseas to continue their roles once training was complete. https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/02/28/…

It wasn’t all IT, not even half.

Re: Update on IT Security Incident at UCSF

#66

Post by PeterStuer »

mc32 wrote: post #21
rkho wrote: post #13

As a reminder, in 2017 UCSF offshored all of its IT staff to HCL Technologies and forced their then-employees to train their replacements before laying them off. They brought the replacements into the Bay Area on H1B temporarily while they were trained by their soon-to-be-laid-off counterparts and then sent back overseas to continue their roles once training was complete. https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/02/28/…

What kind of monster of an employer makes their employees train the replacements they're getting fired for? If that were me, I'd organize and have everyone quit; let them figure things out. Screw the pittance of a severance.

From what i have seen over the years this is an industry standard practice. Don't assume the employees about to be sacked are in the know.

Sometimes this is hidden under the guise of big IT modernization projects. The company transitions or consolidates towards ERP platform X. It is a huge operation that touches almost every part of the business. Armies of analysts are brought in to map the AS-IS business operations, the system is developed, once stable enough, the other shoe drops and the whole IT department is now moved off- or near shore to the company that transitioned the system while other 'non-strategic' parts of the business are 'streamlined' into managed service contracts with other parties in the project consortium.

Re: Update on IT Security Incident at UCSF

#67

Post by dogecoinbase »

strictnein wrote: post #60
dogecoinbase wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know how much IT personnel at UCSF make -- you get what you pay for. If you want expertise, it's not hard to find.

People who can properly secure a large enterprise are, actually, quite hard to find.

They're really, really not. You just have to pay an appropriate salary.

Re: Update on IT Security Incident at UCSF

#68

Post by charlchi »

redditmigrant wrote: post #54
rkho wrote: post #13

As a reminder, in 2017 UCSF offshored all of its IT staff to HCL Technologies and forced their then-employees to train their replacements before laying them off. They brought the replacements into the Bay Area on H1B temporarily while they were trained by their soon-to-be-laid-off counterparts and then sent back overseas to continue their roles once training was complete. https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/02/28/…

It's tiring to keep hearing these stories and tieing them to H1B. Satya Nadella also started on an H1B, Sundar Pichai did too and so did Andrew Ng. Just those 3 combined have created more jobs than were lost here. So please, stop spreading partial info that creates hate against a whole swathe of people who have come here legally, have contributed extremely productively to this nation in the form of taxes and labor, a…

This is a labour issue, not an issue of xenophobia. Though I'm sure these companies would love us to believe it's about xenophobia. The breakdown of western labour protections and the march towards near chinese levels of exploitation will likely be overseen by people who claim that western labour protections are racist.

Re: Update on IT Security Incident at UCSF

#69

Post by robbrown451 »

ukulele wrote: post #34
robbrown451 wrote: post #20

Maybe there should be a law that if you pay a ransom, you are required to pay the same amount as a fine. Because paying these ransoms is funding the criminals.... how about you have to also fund law enforcement to combat those criminals? (also, this should reduce the amount that actually goes to the bad guys, since the amount of ransom would have greater downward pressure, i.e. if they'd probably not be able to colle…

This would make the payers far less likely to report it, and ultimately make it much harder to track

Well if it was illegal to not report it, they'd be putting themselves at a lot of risk. I can't see a university or corporation making a large payment like that illegally.

Also, it may not make the costs to them more. Remember the amount of ransom is based on what the ransomers think the ransomees are willing to pay. Today, the reason it was 1.4 million instead of 2.8 million, is that they didn't think UCSF would pay the latter amount. So if they knew UCSF would have to pay double the amount of the ransom, they'd have to only ask for half as much.

Post reply on HN