3 ms·
Targeting politically important industries rather than strategically important ones (no price increases get people quite as fumed and likely to take to the stre
by Analemma_ 5y ago
Targeting politically important industries rather than strategically important ones (no price increases get people quite as fumed and likely to take to the streets as gasoline and meat price increases) is an interesting development in quasi-state-sponsored cybercrime.
- dudleypippin 5y agoInteresting. My third thought was “Huh, perhaps we’ll be eating less beef until the inevitable price shock and hoarding passes.” (First thought was for the poor IT folks stuck in this mess and the second was remembering a sensitive machine that was open to all of AWS because the vendor’s servers “needed access to push frequent updates.” and “nobody has ever pushed back on that requirement before.”)
- briefcomment 5y agoKlaus Schwab of the WEF “predicted” this a year ago [1]. Either the WEF and other NGOs are incredibly prescient on a number of unrelated issues, or we may be getting taken for a ride. [1]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0DKRvS-C04o https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0DKRvS-C04o
- neither_color 5y agogasoline and meat price increases These hackers sure are progressive. I wonder what they'll target next: plastics, flights, or ammo?
- mtalantikite 5y agoMy first thought was imagining a hacker org taking inspiration from the movie 12 Monkeys.
- r00fus 5y agoIn the case of the pipeline disruption, it was reported that the USG disrupted the CCC of the ransomer and their crypto accounts were drained. I wonder if a similar sort of reaction will happen here or if the attackers will move more quickly? From a technical standpoint, why was JBS' backup chain a workable solution for JBS and not for the pipeline operator? Was it incompetence on the part of the attacker or just a better defense, or luck?