4 ms·

This was an interesting and valid point. Container ship based freight looks to be a bit more fragmented: https://www.statista.com/statistics/198206/share-of-le

• Animats 5y ago
  A few years, back, Maersk went down for almost a week due to encryption-type malware.[1] Things happen slowly enough in sea shipping that the impacts were mostly to Maersk itself. It cost them about US$330 million. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cyber-attack-maersk-idUSKBN19I1NO https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cyber-attack-maersk-idUSK...
  • mindracer 5y ago
    Crazy how they were saved by a domain controller that had been knocked offline by a power outage before the worm hit
    • midasuni 5y ago
      Why couldn’t they restore from backup?
      • angry_octet 5y ago
        They had no offline backups of the DCs, online backups were wiped. https://www.wired.com/story/notpetya-cyberattack-ukraine-russia-code-crashed-the-world/ https://www.wired.com/story/notpetya-cyberattack-ukraine-rus... But the lack of backups is just a symptom. From the article: In 2016, one group of IT executives had pushed for a preemptive security redesign of Maersk’s entire global network. They called attention to Maersk’s less-than-perfect software patching, outdated operating systems, and above all insufficient network segmentation. That last vulnerability in particular, they warned, could allow malware with access to one part of the network to spread wildly beyond its initial foothold, exactly as NotPetya would the next year. The security revamp was green-lit and budgeted. But its success was never made a so-called key performance indicator for Maersk’s most senior IT overseers, so implementing it wouldn’t contribute to their bonuses. They never carried the security makeover forward.
  • cbHXBY1D 5y ago
    Ha I remember you posting about that at the time.