3 ms·
As a gang with a "provable" identity and a will to avoid any latency they may release those data as a way to "educate" their future victims.
by natmaka 5y ago
As a gang with a "provable" identity and a will to avoid any latency they may release those data as a way to "educate" their future victims.
- bena 5y agoFirst, that assumes that people are rational actors. They are not. Second, if these people were trustworthy, they wouldn't be blackmailing you in the first place. And once they get the money, what's to stop them from asking for more? It's not like they stop having the information once they get paid.
- natmaka 5y agoPeople are not _always_ rational nor _never_ rational. We probably fundamentally agree: in my opinion one should not concede to a blackmail, in order to destroy blackmailing. However the associated cost, for the victim, may be very high, roughly a sacrifice. Such blackmailing works because there are known cases of ransoms paid, leading to recovery without any known after-shock (in 2020, as far as I understand: Tillamook and also Delaware County, Florence, Utah Univ, CWT...). Not sticking to this behavior would be a threat to the ransomware "business", and people gaining from it are probably rational to the point of trying to preserve it. Most, even quite dumb, don't kill the goose that lays golden eggs. Moreover in some cases the victim lost access to at least part of data vital to its operations, and pays in order to survive. Releasing data stolen to a victim plainly refusing to pay or even simply trying to play for time sends a powerful signal to future victims.