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.

Comments
The Ransomware Dilemma: What if Your Local Government Is Next?
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
BigKahuna13
100%
0%
BigKahuna13,
User Rank: Apprentice
5/30/2019 | 12:52:22 PM
To pay, or not to pay?
Scary how many groups and organizations have silently paid to avoid the public humiliation that Baltimore is currently enduring.
schopj
100%
0%
schopj,
User Rank: Strategist
5/30/2019 | 3:43:53 PM
What if you pay, then get hit again?
One of the things to consider when looking at the initial ransom cost vs cost of recovery is the cost of the next infection.  If you pay, the attackers now know youre willing to pay.  They ARE going to target you again.  So that 100,000 could quickly turn into much more over time because now youre seen as an easy target.  A city that doesnt pay, it doesnt make much sense for attackers to spend a lot of time and effort infecting them again when they get nothing out of it.  If we really want these types of attacks to stop, we need to make it cost more and profit less.  The only way to do that is for all businesses and governments to refuse to pay.  Without payment, the attackers will move on.  As long as even some vitims choose to pay, there will be more and more victims and the costs over the entire economy will keep going up.  
BanduraCSO
50%
50%
BanduraCSO,
User Rank: Author
5/31/2019 | 8:17:49 AM
Re: What if you pay, then get hit again?
Totally agree.  Guess the conundrum is there are a healthy number of organizations that are paying and so how do you stop something like this that's already in motion.  On the cost side, Baltimore is now pointing to $8.1 million in lost revenue.  I think if we expand this analysis out the real issue is comparing all of these costs against the investment they should have made to ensure an up to date IT infrastructure and more importantly to apply a patch that's been available for two years. 
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
5/31/2019 | 3:12:02 PM
Re: What if you pay, then get hit again?
Agreed. The reason companies are typically told not to pay the ransom is because you are operating under the mechanism that you are expecting an unethical entity to act ethically and do what they say they are going to do. Nothing stopping them from going back on their promises and exposing either the data or secrets that you don't want exposed. 

On the flip side if they are extorting data and you don't have a viable backup program, then you may be at their mercy for getting back.

Its really a lose lose any way you look at it.
REISEN1955
50%
50%
REISEN1955,
User Rank: Ninja
6/5/2019 | 1:09:49 PM
Re: What if you pay, then get hit again?
FOR A SMILE - Firms that lack a backup strategy (damn dumb) now have one - their encrypted data stored securely by thieves.  Negotiate a payment plan and if they backup but do not encrypt the data locally, then the firm has a viable and secure method of restoration and recovery.  Monthly fee service. See, it works if you think weird.


Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
I Smell a RAT! New Cybersecurity Threats for the Crypto Industry
David Trepp, Partner, IT Assurance with accounting and advisory firm BPM LLP,  7/9/2021
News
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
Commentary
It's in the Game (but It Shouldn't Be)
Tal Memran, Cybersecurity Expert, CYE,  7/9/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Enterprise Cybersecurity Plans in a Post-Pandemic World
Download the Enterprise Cybersecurity Plans in a Post-Pandemic World report to understand how security leaders are maintaining pace with pandemic-related challenges, and where there is room for improvement.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-31923
PUBLISHED: 2021-09-24
Ping Identity PingAccess before 5.3.3 allows HTTP request smuggling via header manipulation.
CVE-2021-41581
PUBLISHED: 2021-09-24
x509_constraints_parse_mailbox in lib/libcrypto/x509/x509_constraints.c in LibreSSL through 3.4.0 has a stack-based buffer over-read. When the input exceeds DOMAIN_PART_MAX_LEN, the buffer lacks '\0' termination.
CVE-2021-41583
PUBLISHED: 2021-09-24
vpn-user-portal (aka eduVPN or Let's Connect!) before 2.3.14, as packaged for Debian 10, Debian 11, and Fedora, allows remote authenticated users to obtain OS filesystem access, because of the interaction of QR codes with an exec that uses the -r option. This can be leveraged to obtain additional VP...
CVE-2021-41584
PUBLISHED: 2021-09-24
Gradle Enterprise before 2021.1.3 can allow unauthorized viewing of a response (information disclosure of possibly sensitive build/configuration details) via a crafted HTTP request with the X-Gradle-Enterprise-Ajax-Request header.
CVE-2020-19949
PUBLISHED: 2021-09-23
A cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the /link/add.html component of YzmCMS v5.3 allows attackers to execute arbitrary web scripts or HTML.