Colonial paid up. Are you next?

bank systems go down all the time, so i’m not sure what you mean. If you are referring to a bank losing all its customers because it went down and had to pay a ransom, I suppose that makes sense. But the hackers don’t care about that. They don’t hack into a bank, call them up and demand payment or else we’ll shut your system down because we know you’d lose a bunch of customers if we did. The bank’s reputation if they shut their system down isn’t the hacker’s concern. Plus, it’s not like a bank, after having their system shut down, is just going to throw up their hands and say, Oh well, we’re just going to lose all of our customers now, no point in paying the ransom or even trying to get the system back online. Might as well go home and start posting my resume. They’re still going to pay/fix things.

I see the logic you’re using, but you’re trying to play 4D chess with hackers and bankers living in a 2D world.

My premise is that a bank system being taken hostage will in itself destroy the bank. A pipeline will resume the flow of oil with (almost literally) the flip of a switch, customers will not return to a bank they no longer trust.

1 Like

Perhaps. But there’s no denying there are much easier targets that are more susceptible to leverage.

Ahhh. OK I get your reasoning now. And yes that is quite possible. So if a ransomware was going to hit a bank they’d probably just not announce the attack to the world. Then it would all happen in secret caused if the bank let the world know it happened then they’d be potentially ruined as a business. I can see then how people might suspect that banks have been hit in secret and we just don’t know about it.

But for a ransomware attack to be effective they are going to have to do something real. Banks won’t just pay out money because someone claims they will attack them. There has to be a legit proven threat that thee bank can’t just shut off. Ransomware depends on seizing things in a way that makes them inaccessible and not easily reversed.

Its like thinking rich people will pay out ransoms for kidnap threats.

2 Likes

Thus, an attack on a bank is about destruction, not money.

You’re underestimating the complexity of a pipeline and the role the computer system plays. I don’t really get why you think it’s easy to just flip a switch after what literally just happened.

Than a bank? Surely yes

Than a bank? No, I’d say they are up there at the top.

You haven’t watched enough Die Hard movies. It’s never just about destruction. In the end, it’s always about the money.

4 Likes

Sorry, I’ve never really been a fan of Christmas movies.

Edit : Come on, I can’t leave it at that, even as a joke. Die Hard is one of the best ever.

(But to your point - they used destruction as a distraction while they went after the money. The destruction didn’t produce the money.)

2 Likes

Meanwhile…DarkSide Ransomware Gang Quits After Servers, Bitcoin Stash Seized

2 Likes

Or does it? :wink:

However, the payment was in vain. Not sure why they bothered when they had backups.

Bloomberg reported earlier Thursday that Colonial had paid the hackers a sum of nearly $5 million, and that the decryption tool ultimately wasn’t effective in restoring operations. Instead, Colonial was able to recover by relying on system backups, Bloomberg reported.

em mine
https://www.wsj.com/articles/colonial-pipeline-expects-to-fully-restore-service-thursday-following-cyberattack-11620917499?st=mtcmh8e6ksn34jp&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

I’m assuming the insurers do that EXACTLY because of their bottom line. Kinda like why an insurer won’t insure your car if you have accidents all the time. There may not be a premium level that makes sense for them. Last year losses incurred were at $5.5B in France so either they jack up premiums through the roof and nobody gets insured or they operate at a loss.

AXA (5th largest insurer in Europe) was the one who axed ransom insurance in France earlier this month, actually prior to the Colonial hack. Other thing is ability to define the right premiums accurately. Ransom amounts are very variable and also it may be hard to predict how often will clients get hacked. It could also entice hackers to ask for larger ransoms if they know the company has insurance up to a certain level. If company has $10M ransom insurance, would you ask for $5M only?

I just tried to pay my utility bill at pge.com and this is their message:(ulp)

YourAccount is temporarily unavailable. To make a payment through other means, please visit View & Pay Bill>. If you need to check on outages, please visit www.pge.com/pge-outages.

edit 16 May. the website is back up. Oh well. It was a fun conspiracy :woozy_face:

1 Like
2 Likes

Drudge this morning featuring front and center the latest hack attack on JBS:

Meat supplier JBS latest hack attack victim

Hope your freezer is full. :wink:

1 Like

But wait. There is more!:

From the WaPo: Ransomware attacks are closing schools, delaying chemotherapy and derailing everyday life

Could ransomware attack impact be in your personal future? Let’s hope not.

But there is this from Marketwatch:

How safe from attack is your brokerage account?

The DOJ was able to recover just over 1/2 of the ransom paid. I didn’t read far enough to see if they’re giving any of it back to Colonial, or if they’re just scalping a service fee.

1 Like

In the category of somewhat misleading, they recovered nearly 100% of what was paid, it’s just declined in value by 50% since being paid.

4 Likes

Yeah. That’s pretty funny. Not if you’re a crypto fan, I guess. And with crypto you don’t even get free meals and entertainment like in Vegas. :wink:

1 Like

Actually they recovered 85% of what was paid, not nearly 100%.

1 Like

85% is much more near 100% than 50%… :wink:

3 Likes