Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Lol what's an IT guy at a small law firm gonna do against a Russian cyber attack? Those vatnigs run sophisticated ops.

Couple of months ago UnitedHealth was hit and even they paid out. And this is a half a trillion dollar company.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/unitedhealth-ransom-paid-change-healthcare-attack/

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

How are payments “intercepted”? Is that even a thing. seems like the banks problem unless they literally sent it to the Russians


Putting the :e: in spookie

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The Russians sent an email with the right name and email address saying "Send it to this shady overseas bank account" and some r-slur did literally send it to them

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Phishing and social engineering, and it's pretty common. When I was going through the loan process and then escrow, I got a bunch of emails about phishing and fraud and not to send money to anyone other than the official business listed.

Bank lady who transferred the downpayment also asked me to make sure it's the official escrow account.


Krayon sexually assaulted his sister. https://i.rdrama.net/images/17118241526738973.webp https://i.rdrama.net/images/17118241426254768.webp https://i.rdrama.net/images/17156480765435808.webp

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

they sometimes hack into the system to see if someone does already adhoc payments over email( alot of people do), and then they craft a malicious lookalike email.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Wouldn't have went down that way if he was there

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

and even they paid out

This might be a spicy hot take, but I think paying ransom like this should be a criminal offense, tantamount to financially supporting the criminals. Anybody who authorizes a ransom payment should face prison time.

The only reason these attackers even do these attacks is because they get paid.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

That's kind of the problem, though - in my experience with ransomware attacks (granted, in infrastructure that was maintained by one very intelligent but extremely overworked bong) they tend to go after backups first, and then encrypt the existing infrastructure. If you have no way to recover your mission critical data, depending on the field, you're basically dead in the water.

That's what cybersecurity insurance is for - they communicate with the threat actor, provide the ransom funds, and assist with recovery. I get where you're coming from, but the choice is considered in a vacuum - either you lose all your customer data, tokenized payment information, etc, or the insurance pays out. And, even then, you don't always get your shit back. I had one scenario where the threat actor's decryption utility wouldn't work on individual files >~100GB (which included the main company database) and the threat actor - using lockbit - just kind of shrugged and said, well, you already paid us, and we have no incentive to help you resolve this. And since lockbit is Ransomware-as-a-service, I doubt they even had the ability.

That's why these attacks are so effective - short of crazy advances in quantum computing or a significant error in the threat actor's encryption utility, it is physically impossible to get anything back. Another reason why 3-2-1 backup solutions are so fricking important - airgapped backups would have saved the company in this case, but tape and storage is expensive.

The whole problem would be solved if we just glassed Russia or never invented computers, both of which I strongly advocate for.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Yeah I get that, but the only reason these attacks exist in the first place is because people pay out. If they didn't, the attackers literally wouldn't do this. (Obviously the actual OP isn't ransomware at all and is a totally different type of attack that would still exist.)

If you have no way to recover your mission critical data, depending on the field, you're basically dead in the water.

Yeah. Sucks to suck. The same is true if they don't have proper backups and their server catches fire. That's why you need proper, secured backups. Nothing should even be able to modify them in the first place, once they're written they should be absolutely read-only. And for particularly valuable data, they should have an offline copy.

It's not even difficult. My company has offsite backups that I helped setup. The data is technically stored at a totally different company, on different systems. I think we literally pay like $0.0004/GB/mo for it. Cheap as frick. The only excuse to not do so is laziness.

Allowing people to pay these ransoms does nothing but subsidize places with shitty backup/security policy because they have an avenue to recover their fricked up assets.

I know my suggestion will never come true because most people don't understand computer/network security and assume that the people falling prey to this were doing all they could and are innocent victims, akin to someone getting mugged while walking on the street minding their own business. But that's fundamentally not true. These aren't state actors, they aren't burning 0days for these ransomware attacks. It's usually a combination of (1) some r-slur letting themselves get hacked by downloading suspicious programs/documents and (2) incompetent IT setup in such a way that if Claire from marketing gets hacked, the hackers can use her credentials to hose the entire network and backup system.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Oh yeah, I basically agree with all of that. The situation I was referring to, the threat actor gained access to the entire network with pass-the-hash stemming from an 8 year old critical CVE in a publicly accessible Exchange 2013 server. Incredibly fricking stupid, and entirely preventable. It was a non-profit with a budget comprised almost entirely of endowments, and C-level didn't think hiring more than one dude to manage infrastructure for a several-hundred employee organization was necessary. As an aside, they still don't, even post-attack.

My point was more that imposing criminal penalties on that sort of thing would absolutely disincentize money-motivated threat actors - but that definitely won't stop ransomware attacks entirely, and would essentially guarantee that the affected company would go under. And not every company is capable - at an OpEx level - of preventing it. In an idea world, on top of implementing criminal penalties for paying out, I'd say a Federal law requiring companies dealing with PII in any capacity to comply with preventative standards would help - like there already is with e.g. HIPAA. Then the cost benefit analysis flips and C-level decides paying the fine for violating such a law is more detrimental than paying a couple more infra guys 110K/year or outsourcing their security to a netsec MSP.

This is all based on personal experience, but in principle I agree that paying out just incentizes threat actors. I just don't know what the solution is to make luddite executives prioritize that sort of thing without killing otherwise valuable businesses in the process.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

just make redteaming legal. anybody on the street can pwn your servers and negotiate a reasonable sum as recompense. Instead of rare attacks taking down the whole company, there would be a steady stream of local blackhats chipping away at you and closing all the holes that russian ransomware attacks would otherwise use.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this site is now dumber for having read it. May God have mercy on your soul.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Have you owned the libs yet?

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

It should be legal to hack Russia and China back, it's absurd we don't give out letter of mark or something

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Best practices still go a long way in keeping things safe. They still should have just gone with an MSP and gotten cyber insurance, imo.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Campanies get ransomwared by being r-slurred, the larger the company the more r-slurs you have. :marseyxd:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.