4 ms·

Meaningless stat without a baseline to compare against. How many who didn't pay were hit again?

jessaustin 5y ago
If the attacker isn't paid for the first attack, why would she attack again? She's not doing it for the lulz! I do agree with you that there should be more visibility for the "silent majority" of firms who operate their businesses responsibly, and therefore don't ever need to pay ransom.
- Trias11 5y ago
  Because second attacker might not be briefed by the first one.
  - Covzire 5y ago
    If they actually have proper backups to avoid paying the first one, my guess is they are much more likely to also have the skills to prevent a second breach.
    - Trias11 5y ago
      I agree on backups and actually working and robust restore system. Cheapest way to avoid paying ransoms. You can never be sure about 100% hacker safe but backup/restore system can be life saver
  - 8note 5y ago
    And also due to the attacks being cheap to run
- arnvald 5y ago
  If the victim doesn't pay the first time, they suffer consequences and next time might decide to pay instead.
  - jessaustin 5y ago
    ISTM we only hear about the tiny minority of "victims" who do "suffer consequences". Most organizations who get ransomed just shut off a bunch of unnecessary stuff, re-provision the necessary stuff with passwords turned off, restore from backup, and hire some security consultants.
- Tade0 5y ago
  I'm sorry but I have to ask: why assume the attacker is female?
  - leesalminen 5y ago
    It seems like "they're" would've been a better choice there, as there are a plurality of attackers in the world.
  - tacostakohashi 5y ago
    Why not? Why assume that they are male?
    - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
      Statistically it seems the safer bet that they are male.
  - jmcgough 5y ago
    Probably trying to diversify pronoun usage. Would we be pointing this out if they said 'he'?
    - flatline 5y ago
      No, because for better or worse “he” is the default for a plurality or unknown gender in most (all?) romance languages, including English. Times and sensitivities change but “she” still connotes more knowledge than “he” so it’s bound to cause some confusion.
      - acomar 5y ago
        what was true centuries ago is no longer true. "he" is not gender neutral in English, in any sense of the term. it's only used as such in historical writing - languages evolve over time. "she" connotes as much knowledge as "he".
        5y ago
- kristopolous 5y ago
  That's not for us to intellectually deduce, give the numbers. They have it. Is it 79%? 99? 1? Maybe it's all automated shotgun based attacks and they don't close the holes and so the act of paying the ransom is statistically meaningless This is shoddy journalism. Might as well just say "X%". It implies you shouldn't pay lest you fall victim again but they don't actually say that. Things that implicate what they refuse to say is kind of suspect
  - jessaustin 5y ago
    The "journalism" has been shoddy from the start. This entire "Russians are pwning the electric company" meme has always been motivated more by politics, CYA, PR, and marketing than it has by anything real. TFA itself is a mail-it-in, paraphrase-the-press-release "effort". They actually link to the press release rather than the original marketing document; it's possible TFA's authors haven't read the latter! There's no guarantee the marketing document answers your question, but if you have an email address you don't mind getting spammed you could find out for yourself. [0] I don't have such an email address. [0] https://www.cybereason.com/ebook-ransomware-the-true-cost-to-business https://www.cybereason.com/ebook-ransomware-the-true-cost-to...
- TameAntelope 5y ago
  The whole point of gathering statistics is that making up logic for what could be the case is generally a massive waste of time.
- admax88q 5y ago
  The attacks are likely automated. Like any computer virus.
insickness 5y ago
It's likely the reinfection rate is high in both cases since it's so difficult to ensure every possible back door has been closed.

If the attacker isn't paid for the first attack, why would she attack again? She's not doing it for the lulz! I do agree with you that there should be more visibility for the "silent majority" of firms who operate their businesses responsibly, and therefore don't ever need to pay ransom.

Trias11 5y ago
Because second attacker might not be briefed by the first one.
- Covzire 5y ago
  If they actually have proper backups to avoid paying the first one, my guess is they are much more likely to also have the skills to prevent a second breach.
  - Trias11 5y ago
    I agree on backups and actually working and robust restore system. Cheapest way to avoid paying ransoms. You can never be sure about 100% hacker safe but backup/restore system can be life saver
- 8note 5y ago
  And also due to the attacks being cheap to run
arnvald 5y ago
If the victim doesn't pay the first time, they suffer consequences and next time might decide to pay instead.
- jessaustin 5y ago
  ISTM we only hear about the tiny minority of "victims" who do "suffer consequences". Most organizations who get ransomed just shut off a bunch of unnecessary stuff, re-provision the necessary stuff with passwords turned off, restore from backup, and hire some security consultants.
Tade0 5y ago
I'm sorry but I have to ask: why assume the attacker is female?
- leesalminen 5y ago
  It seems like "they're" would've been a better choice there, as there are a plurality of attackers in the world.
- tacostakohashi 5y ago
  Why not? Why assume that they are male?
  - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
    Statistically it seems the safer bet that they are male.
- jmcgough 5y ago
  Probably trying to diversify pronoun usage. Would we be pointing this out if they said 'he'?
  - flatline 5y ago
    No, because for better or worse “he” is the default for a plurality or unknown gender in most (all?) romance languages, including English. Times and sensitivities change but “she” still connotes more knowledge than “he” so it’s bound to cause some confusion.
    - acomar 5y ago
      what was true centuries ago is no longer true. "he" is not gender neutral in English, in any sense of the term. it's only used as such in historical writing - languages evolve over time. "she" connotes as much knowledge as "he".
      - 5y ago
kristopolous 5y ago
That's not for us to intellectually deduce, give the numbers. They have it. Is it 79%? 99? 1? Maybe it's all automated shotgun based attacks and they don't close the holes and so the act of paying the ransom is statistically meaningless This is shoddy journalism. Might as well just say "X%". It implies you shouldn't pay lest you fall victim again but they don't actually say that. Things that implicate what they refuse to say is kind of suspect
- jessaustin 5y ago
  The "journalism" has been shoddy from the start. This entire "Russians are pwning the electric company" meme has always been motivated more by politics, CYA, PR, and marketing than it has by anything real. TFA itself is a mail-it-in, paraphrase-the-press-release "effort". They actually link to the press release rather than the original marketing document; it's possible TFA's authors haven't read the latter! There's no guarantee the marketing document answers your question, but if you have an email address you don't mind getting spammed you could find out for yourself. [0] I don't have such an email address. [0] https://www.cybereason.com/ebook-ransomware-the-true-cost-to-business https://www.cybereason.com/ebook-ransomware-the-true-cost-to...
TameAntelope 5y ago
The whole point of gathering statistics is that making up logic for what could be the case is generally a massive waste of time.
admax88q 5y ago
The attacks are likely automated. Like any computer virus.

insickness 5y ago

It's likely the reinfection rate is high in both cases since it's so difficult to ensure every possible back door has been closed.