Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Endpoint

4/28/2017
11:30 AM
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
Google+
RSS
E-Mail
100%
0%

Ransomware Payout Doesn't Pay Off

About 40% of small- and midsized businesses hit with ransomware paid their attackers, but less than half got their information back.

Ransomware, ironically, is a crime based on trust. Victims pay attackers who compromise their data with an expectation it will be returned to them.

Unfortunately, a growing number of ransomware targets pay thousands of dollars to get their data back, but receive nothing. This was the most surprising result to come from a Bitdefender survey of 250 IT pros working in small and medium businesses (SMBs), says senior threat analyst Bogdan Botezatu.

The survey, conducted by Spiceworks, discovered one in five SMBs was hit with a ransomware attack within the past 12 months. Of the 20% targeted, 38% paid attackers an average of $2,423 to release their data. Less than half (45%) got their information back.

"Until now, ransomware was a business where honesty was key," Botezatu explains. "Everyone paid the ransom expecting they would get their data back … the ransomware space is continuously changing. Honor among criminals is no longer there."

He says this reflects a broader trend across cybercrime as attackers' boundaries change. Many used to avoid healthcare attacks because they could potentially harm patients. Now, healthcare organizations are frequently targeted, and lack the tech and best practices to defend themselves.

Similarly, SMBs represent a growing pool of victims as attackers seek weaker targets. Ransomware had mostly hit consumers until now, says Botezatu. Businesses weren't targeted as often because cybercriminals likely knew about their strong security tools and data backups. 

"They're not going to the consumer or enterprise that much," he continues. "They found their sweet spot in the middle."

Researchers found SMBs are appealing targets for ransomware because they handle the same sensitive business information (customer data, financial records, product info) as larger organizations, but lack the strong security measures to protect it.

Attackers know they're more likely to receive payment from SMBs, which have more sensitive data than consumers. An individual may be willing to pay about $1,000 for ransomed files. A business with hundreds of customers will pay far more because they need that information, Botezatu says.

Email, cited by 77% of SMBs, is the most popular vector of attack. Cybercriminals use email to compel victims to open or download attachments, or click malicious links, reported 56% and 54% of SMBs, respectively. Nearly one-third (31%) of attacks occurred via social engineering.

"This is serious," says Botezatu. "Whatever you do, you cannot block email in a company - and hackers have a wide assortment of file extensions they can squeeze ransomware into."

Most SMBs hit with ransomware attacks were able to mitigate the attack by restoring data from backup (65%), or through security software or practices (52%). One-quarter of those targeted could not find a solution to address the problem and lost their data as a result.

Botezatu advises SMBs to "strongly consider" complementing their security strategy with a backup security solution. Ransomware is a highly volatile type of attack, he explains, and it only needs to run once to be effective. Criminals don't need to be persistent to encrypt all your data.

If you are attacked? "Don't pay up," he says. "Try to do without the data."

An attack should serve as a lesson learned, he continues. If people continue paying to get their information, ransomware attacks will continue as a means of easy money for cybercriminals. While Botezatu thinks ransomware is here to stay, he urges victims to avoid paying up.

"Every payment you make keeps the ecosystem alive," he emphasizes.

Related Content:

Kelly Sheridan is the Staff Editor at Dark Reading, where she focuses on cybersecurity news and analysis. She is a business technology journalist who previously reported for InformationWeek, where she covered Microsoft, and Insurance & Technology, where she covered financial ... View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/14/2020
Lock-Pickers Face an Uncertain Future Online
Seth Rosenblatt, Contributing Writer,  8/10/2020
Hacking It as a CISO: Advice for Security Leadership
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  8/10/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
7 New Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities That Could Put Your Enterprise at Risk
In this Dark Reading Tech Digest, we look at the ways security researchers and ethical hackers find critical vulnerabilities and offer insights into how you can fix them before attackers can exploit them.
Flash Poll
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
This special report takes a look at how enterprises are using threat intelligence, as well as emerging best practices for integrating threat intel into security operations and incident response. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2015-8033
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
In Textpattern 4.5.7, the password-reset feature does not securely tether a hash to a user account.
CVE-2020-15692
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
In Nim 1.2.4, the standard library browsers mishandles the URL argument to browsers.openDefaultBrowser. This argument can be a local file path that will be opened in the default explorer. An attacker can pass one argument to the underlying open command to execute arbitrary registered system commands...
CVE-2020-15693
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
In Nim 1.2.4, the standard library httpClient is vulnerable to a CR-LF injection in the target URL. An injection is possible if the attacker controls any part of the URL provided in a call (such as httpClient.get or httpClient.post), the User-Agent header value, or custom HTTP header names or values...
CVE-2020-15694
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
In Nim 1.2.4, the standard library httpClient fails to properly validate the server response. For example, httpClient.get().contentLength() does not raise any error if a malicious server provides a negative Content-Length.
CVE-2015-8032
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
In Textpattern 4.5.7, an unprivileged author can change an article's markup setting.