Attacks/Breaches

3/11/2019
11:00 AM
50%
50%

Georgia's Jackson County Pays $400K to Ransomware Attackers

The ransomware campaign started March 1 and shut down most of Jackson County's IT systems.

Jackson County, a rural area of Georgia located about 60 miles from Atlanta, has paid $400,000 to regain access to systems and data locked down in a recent ransomware campaign.

The cyberattack was first confirmed by officials on March 1. It shut down the county's network and knocked computers, email services, and websites offline. While the website and 911 emergency system were reportedly unharmed, Jackson County was mostly disconnected.

"Everything we have is down," said Sheriff Janis Mangum to StateScoop. "We are doing our bookings the way we used to do it before computers. We're operating by paper in terms of reports and arrest bookings. We've continued to function. It's just more difficult."

Following the attack, Jackson County alerted the FBI and a cybersecurity response consultant, who communicated with the attackers and negotiated a $400,000 price for the decryption key.

Paying ransom is a controversial topic among cybersecurity experts. Businesses that pay are still subject to downtime, incomplete transactions, and unhappy customers following a ransomware attack. Further, the return of data isn't guaranteed, and payment encourages criminal activity.

Still, in this case and many others, the ransom is a small price to pay compared with the cost of rebuilding the infrastructure from scratch. "We had to make a determination on whether to pay," said Jackson County manager Kevin Poe to OnlineAthens. "We could have literally been down months and months and spent as much or more money trying to get our system rebuilt."

Read more details here.

 

 

Join Dark Reading LIVE for two cybersecurity summits at Interop 2019. Learn from the industry's most knowledgeable IT security experts. Check out the Interop agenda here.

Dark Reading's Quick Hits delivers a brief synopsis and summary of the significance of breaking news events. For more information from the original source of the news item, please follow the link provided in this article. View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
REISEN1955
100%
0%
REISEN1955,
User Rank: Ninja
3/18/2019 | 10:44:51 AM
Re: AND AGAIN - BACKUPS AND DISASTER RECOVERY?
You are indeed correct on this particular case but larger issue remains such as City of Atlanta - rebuilt everything from scratch and you would think THAT entity has a good budget and obbviously did not have a restoration plan.  I am not talking ransomware either ---- servers DO FAIL sometimes so what do you do then.  Lost data may as well be encrypted data.  I am beginning to think of ransomware entities as good backup entities --- pay them a monthly ransome, eh, fee for backup and then you have encrypted saved off-site data.  Think about it, it almost is a viable idea!!!!!

Added comment - if I remember well, the IT folk had a plan but it was judged more expensive to restore than to pay a ransom.  Well, why backup up ALL then.  Just let ransomware steal it and voila --- restoration problem solved on the cheap. 
BubbaHotep
50%
50%
BubbaHotep,
User Rank: Apprentice
3/14/2019 | 3:35:56 PM
Re: AND AGAIN - BACKUPS AND DISASTER RECOVERY?
Before crucifying the IT Admin look at the technology budget for the past five - ten years for this agency.  Chances are they were scraping by on the crumbs left over from Public Safety (police/Fire) and Public Works.  Municipal and county IT have never been at the forefront of any annual budget and have been neglected for decades.
REISEN1955
50%
50%
REISEN1955,
User Rank: Ninja
3/11/2019 | 1:13:03 PM
AND AGAIN - BACKUPS AND DISASTER RECOVERY?
YET ANOTHER DEMO that IT departments do not take backups and DR planning seriously.  What if a server crashed or data center went down?  Happens - see Delta at Hartsfield-Jackson.  See Atlanta.  EGAD they do not have plans and instead pay a ransom and STILL that data is not guaranteed destroyed!!!   IF they had a competant staff and true professionals then these events would be prevented.  On a very small scale, I had a catalog backup system dedicated to my accounts when a consultant in NY State.  Restored a Cryptolocker infection for a small 501C3 account in 3 hours.  Whole network compromised and gone. 

Now this was a small network but the rules fit.  If you FAIL TO PLAN you are really in a PLAN TO FAIL mode and  you will have a disaster.  This is a broken record for me.    (Survived the south tower on September 11 so I am somewhat familiar with a true disaster scenario.  Worked for Aon. )

Secondly - who initiated this disaster?  Which staffer opened up a bad email.  User education might have gone a real long way here. Like the one user who brought down North Carolina last year.  All it takes is a click of a mouse on an infected PDF and off to the races you go.  IT admin should be fired. 
Crowdsourced vs. Traditional Pen Testing
Alex Haynes, Chief Information Security Officer, CDL,  3/19/2019
BEC Scammer Pleads Guilty
Dark Reading Staff 3/20/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
5 Emerging Cyber Threats to Watch for in 2019
Online attackers are constantly developing new, innovative ways to break into the enterprise. This Dark Reading Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at five emerging attack trends and exploits your security team should look out for, along with helpful recommendations on how you can prevent your organization from falling victim.
Flash Poll
The State of Cyber Security Incident Response
The State of Cyber Security Incident Response
Organizations are responding to new threats with new processes for detecting and mitigating them. Here's a look at how the discipline of incident response is evolving.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2018-10091
PUBLISHED: 2019-03-21
AudioCodes IP phone 420HD devices using firmware version 2.2.12.126 allow XSS.
CVE-2018-10093
PUBLISHED: 2019-03-21
AudioCodes IP phone 420HD devices using firmware version 2.2.12.126 allow Remote Code Execution.
CVE-2017-2659
PUBLISHED: 2019-03-21
It was found that dropbear before version 2013.59 with GSSAPI leaks whether given username is valid or invalid. When an invalid username is given, the GSSAPI authentication failure was incorrectly counted towards the maximum allowed number of password attempts.
CVE-2017-16231
PUBLISHED: 2019-03-21
** DISPUTED ** In PCRE 8.41, after compiling, a pcretest load test PoC produces a crash overflow in the function match() in pcre_exec.c because of a self-recursive call. NOTE: third parties dispute the relevance of this report, noting that there are options that can be used to limit the amount of st...
CVE-2017-16232
PUBLISHED: 2019-03-21
** DISPUTED ** LibTIFF 4.0.8 has multiple memory leak vulnerabilities, which allow attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption), as demonstrated by tif_open.c, tif_lzw.c, and tif_aux.c. NOTE: Third parties were unable to reproduce the issue.