3 ms·
>I got bored to keep answering, in general your points seem week which make you sound a bit too much like a ransomware creator. Probably not because you have 3
by ryanlol 9y ago
>I got bored to keep answering, in general your points seem week which make you sound a bit too much like a ransomware creator. Probably not because you have 3 years here but otherwise you do.

Not a ransomware creator but I understand the economics at play. Ransomware is more profitable than sending spam, unless you're spamming to spread malware.
The value of individual installs has historically averaged at significantly less than a dollar each, ransomware is bringing that way up.
You aren't going to stop ransomware unless you figure out a solution to all other malware, or invent a more profitable scheme. People need to do something with their bots and ransomware is always going to make more money than spamming from bots that haven't been able to inbox anything for 5 years.
There's simply no way you'll stop enough people from paying to make viagra spam beat ransomware.
- notgood 9y agoNot really, ransomware is way more dangerous than selling viagra; I may want to kill you if you encrypt my data, not so much if you sell me a couple of viagra pills that don't work. When you scam someone (e.g nigerian scam) you take money from one (or a few) person only, here you are taking data from a lot of people and hoping some very few will pay; making a lot more enemies in the process, likely including state actors; which may make it a federal crime to pay such ransomwares.
- ryanlol 9y agoDiminishing returns, running spam botnets is already so risky that making more enemies by graduating to ransomware probably doesn't make a perceptible difference. Do you go to prison for 25 years or 30? Sure, you could probably deter ransomware by sending DEVGRU to murder the authors, but I doubt it's worth the political shitstorm that'd follow.