Attacks/Breaches

3/31/2015
04:10 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
100%
0%

30% Of Companies Would Pay Ransoms To Cybercriminals

Factor in under-reporting and the growing sophistication of ransomware -- like PacMan's social engineering scheme -- and the number might be higher.

If you're an organization that's been stung by ransomware before, you're more likely to pay up again, and you probably won't tell a soul, according to a study released today by ThreatTrack.

Overall, 30 percent of the organizations surveyed said they would negotiate with cybercriminals for the safe recovery of stolen or encrypted data; but that number jumped to 55 percent when asked of organizations who'd been victims of cyber-extortionists before.

The big splashy cyber-extortion example from recent history is the attack at Sony Pictures and Entertainment in late 2014. Just last week, ransomware held a New Jersey school district hostage, demanding 500 Bitcoins (roughly $123,000). Instead of paying up, the state is conducting an investigation and restored what they could from backups.

But these incidents might be more common than any news reports or official figures will tell us, because companies are less likely to report these incidents -- not to the public, and not to law enforcement, says Stuart Itkin, senior vice president of ThreatTrack.

It isn't that organizations don't fully appreciate the fact that these cyber-extortionists are real criminals who merit real law enforcement. On the contrary, the attack on Sony showed the general public how hackers can more personally, directly "influence the company, extorting it for payment or otherwise impeding the organization's ability to function," Itkin says.

While they have some distaste for negotiating with the people pulling the strings, Itkin says organizations unfortunately do not have "faith or trust in government either to preempt or respond to such attacks."

"Organizations are less likely to report this," he says, "so we'll never know." 

The Threat Track survey hints that the issue is, indeed, more widespread. When asked if they believe other organizations have negotiated with cybercriminals, 86 percent of all survey respondents said "Yes." 

Some even went so far as to suggest that organizations start preparing now. Twenty-three percent of all survey respondents, and 43 percent of those who'd already been cyber-extortion victims, said organizations should set money aside for the purpose of paying ransoms. Fifty-nine percent of all respondents and 74 percent of respondents who were prior ransomware victims say that cyber insurance providers should hire professional negotiators to act as the liaison between victim organizations and the criminals.

Opinions varied by industry. Most opposed to the idea of paying ransoms were members of the healthcare (92 percent against) and financial services (80 percent against) industries. Respondents in the retail and telecom sectors were most concerned about what customers would think -- if, for example, the company chose not to pay a ransom, causing the attacker to publish customer data.

The problem will only get worse, as the attackers who use ransomware continue to up their game. Last week, CSIS reported a new impressively clever and rather nasty ransomware campaign called PacMan.

CSIS has categorized PacMan as high-risk, "partly due to the degree of social engineering that underlies the attack and partly to the destructive code that attempts to be installed on the victim's machine."

The campaign went after a very, very specific cohort: Danish chiropractors. An email, written in what CSIS describes as "flawless Danish" purports to come from a person with neck and back problems who has just moved into the area and is looking for a new chiropractor. The email contains links to Dropbox files, which the sender says are MRI and CT scan images, but are actually ransomware.

PacMan encrypts the files on the local hard disk of any Windows machine with .NET installed. It is also equipped with "'kill process' capabilities that shut down Windows operating system functions like taskmgr, cmd, regedit and more which makes it very hard to remove this malware,” according to KnowBe4. Once installed, it also starts a countdown clock, giving the victim only 24 hours to pay up in Bitcoins or their files will be encrypted forever. 

Sara Peters is Senior Editor at Dark Reading and formerly the editor-in-chief of Enterprise Efficiency. Prior that she was senior editor for the Computer Security Institute, writing and speaking about virtualization, identity management, cybersecurity law, and a myriad ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
4/21/2015 | 9:04:50 PM
Re: Cost of Doing Business?
There are write-offs and other expenses that companies spend without real explanation around them. Nothing needs to be explained to the board, they are mainly on board anyway. :--))
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
4/21/2015 | 9:01:30 PM
Re: Cost of Doing Business?
I agree. At the same time it is not only CIO's responsibility. He/she does not really have any budget to cover all vulnerabilities.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
4/21/2015 | 8:58:49 PM
Re: Cost of Doing Business?
I agree companies put themselves to an hostage situation by not taking proper backup and require security measures. They wound pay ransoms to cover that fact.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
4/21/2015 | 8:56:18 PM
Only 30%?
I would think more companies would pay to recover their data. Data is very expensive when we need it. Companies would most likely do anything to get it back because of needs, regulations and laws.
Technocrati
50%
50%
Technocrati,
User Rank: Ninja
4/1/2015 | 7:06:12 PM
Re: Cost of Doing Business?

"...Sad to see this, and still curious why these criminals remain out of reach."

 

@geriatric    I agree.  And it is my firm belief companies do not want to spend the amount of money it will take to train and proactively monitor.  As you probably know - security based solutions are extremely expensive and if these companies go open source then they have a whole new set of conditions that they are ill-prepaired to deal with.

 

It really is disheartening, because companies are apparently more than willing to expose our personal information to the hands of hackers.   The system is so compromised now - how can any information be trusted ?

As far as catching the crimminals, who are usually outside the country acting under serveral networking layers just makes the issue of catching them nearly impossible.

So get ready for companies to start passing the cost of their ineptness onto consumers.   

Technocrati
50%
50%
Technocrati,
User Rank: Ninja
4/1/2015 | 6:56:48 PM
Re: Cost of Doing Business?

Overall, 30 percent of the organizations surveyed said they would negotiate with cybercriminals for the safe recovery of stolen or encrypted data;

 

This bizzare fact really does little to promote the recruitment of White Hat Hackers. In essence, it probably pays more to extort. 

I wonder how does the company classify this expense ?   How does one explain this to the board ?    Is this another reason for layoffs ?    

 

Probably.

Thomas Claburn
50%
50%
Thomas Claburn,
User Rank: Ninja
4/1/2015 | 6:12:27 PM
Re: Cost of Doing Business?
If you're paying a ransom to unlock corporate data, the money would be better spent firing your CIO or CSO and paying a recruiter to find someone who knows how to maintain secure, redundant backups.
geriatric
50%
50%
geriatric,
User Rank: Moderator
4/1/2015 | 6:48:39 AM
Cost of Doing Business?
It seems as if at least some have resigned themselves to what they believe is an inevitable hostage situation. This reminds me of kidnap insurance for individuals in some countries. You get kidnapped, you contact your insurance provider, they pay the kidnappers, you're home for dinner (so to speak). Sad to see this, and still curious why these criminals remain out of reach.
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
Dark Reading Live EVENTS
INsecurity - For the Defenders of Enterprise Security
A Dark Reading Conference
While red team conferences focus primarily on new vulnerabilities and security researchers, INsecurity puts security execution, protection, and operations center stage. The primary speakers will be CISOs and leaders in security defense; the blue team will be the focus.
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Security Vulnerabilities: The Next Wave
Just when you thought it was safe, researchers have unveiled a new round of IT security flaws. Is your enterprise ready?
Flash Poll
[Strategic Security Report] How Enterprises Are Attacking the IT Security Problem
[Strategic Security Report] How Enterprises Are Attacking the IT Security Problem
Enterprises are spending more of their IT budgets on cybersecurity technology. How do your organization's security plans and strategies compare to what others are doing? Here's an in-depth look.
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2017-0290
Published: 2017-05-09
NScript in mpengine in Microsoft Malware Protection Engine with Engine Version before 1.1.13704.0, as used in Windows Defender and other products, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (type confusion and application crash) via crafted JavaScript code within ...

CVE-2016-10369
Published: 2017-05-08
unixsocket.c in lxterminal through 0.3.0 insecurely uses /tmp for a socket file, allowing a local user to cause a denial of service (preventing terminal launch), or possibly have other impact (bypassing terminal access control).

CVE-2016-8202
Published: 2017-05-08
A privilege escalation vulnerability in Brocade Fibre Channel SAN products running Brocade Fabric OS (FOS) releases earlier than v7.4.1d and v8.0.1b could allow an authenticated attacker to elevate the privileges of user accounts accessing the system via command line interface. With affected version...

CVE-2016-8209
Published: 2017-05-08
Improper checks for unusual or exceptional conditions in Brocade NetIron 05.8.00 and later releases up to and including 06.1.00, when the Management Module is continuously scanned on port 22, may allow attackers to cause a denial of service (crash and reload) of the management module.

CVE-2017-0890
Published: 2017-05-08
Nextcloud Server before 11.0.3 is vulnerable to an inadequate escaping leading to a XSS vulnerability in the search module. To be exploitable a user has to write or paste malicious content into the search dialogue.