4 ms·
It should be a inverse U curve. If the amount is relatively inconsequential or occurs in super high frequency then it should be ignored. But if you lose more t
by KingMachiavelli 5y ago
It should be a inverse U curve. If the amount is relatively inconsequential or occurs in super high frequency then it should be ignored. But if you lose more than 5 million then it's kind of on you
I'd estimate orgs with roughly 100k to 5 million in revenue it is mostly small players and assuming margins of 20% they are really only doing 20k to 1 million in profit/discretionary spending.
Add in a few factors like charity vs Inc, and it shouldn't be hard to narrow down who LE should assist.
Meanwhile the US oil pipeline gets hacked by a exposed password and the whole Federal Government comes in to fix the mess and agrees to spend more money.
- jtbayly 5y agoPerhaps because that affects swaths of the population?
- KingMachiavelli 5y agoWell... the government couldn't even really fix anything besides catch the hackers. At the end of the day it was the limited scope of the attack and some preperation on the companies part that restored functionality as I understand it. Alternitively, these industries are already heavily regulated including extensive safetly regulations - so perhaps a basic level of security practices should also be required. We regulated how high of a ladder an employee can climb without safety equipment but we don't really do anything if a company reuses passwords, runs known vulnerable software, etc. Occasionally there are fines after the fact but that is too late.