5 ms·

Maybe it's time to declare ransomware on important infrastructure as terrorism - if they haven't done that already.

BariumBlue 5y ago
Lol no. Terrorism is "The calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological" I don't think we should start calling everything we don't like terrorism. Nestle? Not terrorists. Dirty roommate that doesn't clean up? Most likely not a terrorist.
- bagacrap 5y ago
  Releasing data on informants really is a threat of unlawful violence (although indirect). The ideological/political angle comes in when you consider that Russia has no interest in fighting this threat because the victim is its main political rival.
dmm 5y ago
I think we should reserve the word terrorism for attacks on the public intended to influence a separate authority, or something close to that.
NikolaNovak 5y ago
Understanding the word is getting diluted recently, generally terrorism is meant to indicate violent acts intended to coerce behaviour for political / ideological purposes. It seems most ransom ware is used for fairly explicit and immediate commercial gain. We already have a word for "bad thing", "crime". If we start using terrorism for every bad thing it becomes meaningless. Mind you, irregardless is becoming a word and literally now has two opposing meanings, so it's likely based on current USA usage terrorism will become a catch all phrase as well if it hasn't already. I am curious however what use it then becomes calling something terrorism. Today there's implicit notion it is a higher threat demanding higher response but even that I think is diluted.
- bagacrap 5y ago
  Arguably it is political. These ransomware attacks are not state-sponsored, but they are state-condoned, like British privateers of the past. They serve to harm the society and way of life of a country Putin sees as a political rival. Arguably it is violent. The threat in this case, should the ransom not be met, is to release information that will lead to violence.
  - NikolaNovak 5y ago
    Fair argument; but for what I think are desired purposes and effects, I think declaring it something like 'National Security Threat' is more productive and less ambiguous/debatable.
rocqua 5y ago
I think what you are going for is to declare it "a threat to national security". The idea being that it allows the CIA and NSA to start fighting back.

Lol no. Terrorism is "The calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological" I don't think we should start calling everything we don't like terrorism. Nestle? Not terrorists. Dirty roommate that doesn't clean up? Most likely not a terrorist.

bagacrap 5y ago
Releasing data on informants really is a threat of unlawful violence (although indirect). The ideological/political angle comes in when you consider that Russia has no interest in fighting this threat because the victim is its main political rival.

dmm 5y ago

I think we should reserve the word terrorism for attacks on the public intended to influence a separate authority, or something close to that.

NikolaNovak 5y ago

Understanding the word is getting diluted recently, generally terrorism is meant to indicate violent acts intended to coerce behaviour for political / ideological purposes. It seems most ransom ware is used for fairly explicit and immediate commercial gain. We already have a word for "bad thing", "crime". If we start using terrorism for every bad thing it becomes meaningless. Mind you, irregardless is becoming a word and literally now has two opposing meanings, so it's likely based on current USA usage terrorism will become a catch all phrase as well if it hasn't already. I am curious however what use it then becomes calling something terrorism. Today there's implicit notion it is a higher threat demanding higher response but even that I think is diluted.

bagacrap 5y ago
Arguably it is political. These ransomware attacks are not state-sponsored, but they are state-condoned, like British privateers of the past. They serve to harm the society and way of life of a country Putin sees as a political rival. Arguably it is violent. The threat in this case, should the ransom not be met, is to release information that will lead to violence.
- NikolaNovak 5y ago
  Fair argument; but for what I think are desired purposes and effects, I think declaring it something like 'National Security Threat' is more productive and less ambiguous/debatable.

rocqua 5y ago

I think what you are going for is to declare it "a threat to national security". The idea being that it allows the CIA and NSA to start fighting back.