Hmmm, I wonder what the markup is on ransom-ware payments and are they deductible as a business expense?
"“I would not be surprised if a significant amount of ransomware both funded terrorism and also organized crime,” Storfer said. “So the question is, is every time that we get hit by SamSam, and every time we facilitate a payment — and here’s where it gets really dicey — does that mean we are technically funding terrorism?”
Proven Data promised to help ransomware victims by unlocking their data with the “latest technology,” according to company emails and former clients. Instead, it obtained decryption tools from cyberattackers by paying ransoms, according to Storfer and an FBI affidavit obtained by ProPublica."
https://features.propublica.org/ransomware/ransomware-attack-data-recovery-firms-paying-hackers/#161943
It's unfortunate that the Bolton/Trump response to this kind of cyber attack is to send in the Third Fleet. One could argue that the Stuxnet attack by the U.S. was an act of war. This LeMay-like thinking is so irresponsible, ignoring the realities of alliances that would come back to haunt us. Tracing the origin of cyber attacks is always very difficult and establishing their links to states even more problematic. We have entered an entirely new form of warfare and responding with kinetic threats is completely non-productive, and doesn't solve the problem. It assumes that attacks are geographic when in reality cyber attacks (assuming they are even proven to be state sponsored) have no geographic limitations.
No comments:
Post a Comment