5 ms·

I find myself puzzled by organizations like these. Let's say they do not attack infrastructure or other critical services, and only leech off huge companies. I

I find myself puzzled by organizations like these. Let's say they do not attack infrastructure or other critical services, and only leech off huge companies. I cannot argue against it?

jnorthrop 5y ago
Are you really intending to condone illegal activity? Just because their targeting "wealthy" companies? That is like condoning a mugger because he is working in a rich neighborhood and not targeting the impoverished.
- everyone 5y ago
  The rich people in that neighborhood have acquired their wealth in an unfair injust way.
- typon 5y ago
  If I heard news that Jeff Bezos bank account was hacked and $50 million dollars were stolen, I don't think I would even bat an eye. When I hear of ransomware shutting down hospital computers I'm furious and want to see these clowns rot in jail. There's clearly a spectrum here of where it starts becoming a heinous act.
  - ohhhhhh 5y ago
    this is a you problem
  - mcguire 5y ago
    The global median household wealth is about $7,500. The median income is around $10,000. To much of the world (making some assumptions based on your presence here on HN), you have more in common with Jeff than you do with much of the world; they might take the same attitude to you.
    - throwaway672000 5y ago
      It's possible the only reason we would disgree if the rest of the world took this attitude is our own greed. To me what's more obviously wrong whether I'm rich or poor is leaking personal info on employees, HR correspondence etc. I don't know whether this group would since they say it hasn't got that far yet but other groups have. Extortion, mugging, burglary etc are worse than the "perfect theft" where you move some numbers from one account to another. I wonder if the people involved believe their own spin that "your boss is the one at fault, would rather you suffer than pay"
- trasz 5y ago
  Bit of an advocatus diaboli, but… Crimes are crimes because they hurt people. Here we’re talking about just lowering company’s profits; same thing happens naturally due to market forces and nobody complains.
  - TchoBeer 5y ago
    Usually lowering a company's profits due to market competition produces value. Just stealing money does not produce value.
    - trasz 5y ago
      The stolen money don’t have a value to the thief?
      - TchoBeer 5y ago
        The amount of value it produces for the theif is equal to the amount of value it takes away from the company
        Hjfrf 5y ago
        Generally much less, if you're taking into account all the wasted time/energy.
        trasz 5y ago
        Million dollars stolen from, say, Bezos, is worth less than that to the thief?
        TchoBeer 5y ago
        We can have a discussion about ethics and utility if it's a starving person stealing from Jeff Bezos, but these ransomware firms are large-scale organizations just like the companies they're stealing from.
- 4gotunameagain 5y ago
  I was looking for a solid argument, since I am not able to provide one. So far there are none presented here either. Are we really going to justify this just by "it is against the law"? So many things are against the law, so many ancient laws demonstrate the inability of humans to create the absolute corpus of ethical behaviours™.
  - mcguire 5y ago
    Since you asked,... The Kantian categorical imperative goes something like, "act as if the basis of your actions would be made universal law." What happens if everyone conducts denial of service and ransom attacks against anyone they perceive as a legitimate target? https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/growing-threat-ransomware-attacks-hospitals https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/growing-threat-ransomware... https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-ruthless-cyber-gang-behind-the-hospital-ransomware-crisis-11623340215 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-ruthless-cyber-gang-behind-...
    - dcow 5y ago
      We'd probably have a society that is really good at building safe redundant software services such that this is no longer a threat (;
    - pope_meat 5y ago
      We'd love in the world that we live in now. Iran's centrifuges have some experience with that. I think it's kind of neat that we're waging war via bit flipping instead of meat flipping, let's call it progress.
  - _manifold 5y ago
    The fact is that these particular situations are much more complex than a false dichotomy of "good" and "evil" corporations, or "large" and "small" corporations. Take any organization you think is "worthy" of being attacked in this manner, and consider all of the implications of such an attack. Think about the people inside the organization, and those outside of the organization that benefit from that its continued operations. I think it's fair to say the public opinion of oil companies is fairly low; however, arguably the biggest impact of the Colonial Pipeline attack was not on the executives running the company, but on the end customers of gas stations unable to fuel their vehicles due to the shortage (whether truly real or created by panic). I would argue that everyday workers unable to get to work or to the store to buy food is more important than a few executives not getting their bonuses or having their shares lose value. This isn't to say that these corporations are above all reproach and should be allowed to continued operating in whatever way they see fit simply because they have employees and customers are relying on them. But it's also the wrong mindset to think that it's OK to attack corporations in this way just because they "deserve it" in some way.
danpalmer 5y ago
> and only leech off huge companies. I cannot argue against it? Médecins Sans Frontières is a huge company. Their annual budget is around $1.6bn. Are you ok with them being subject to ransomware attacks?
- rory 5y ago
  Allegedly BlackMatter is not. > It would not extort healthcare, critical infrastructure, oil and gas, defense, non-profit, and government organizations
  - danpalmer 5y ago
    That's good. I wonder if they'd extort the company that manages the building I live in. If they did the most likely negative outcomes are that I'll receive worse service and pay more for my service charge. That's not too bad for me, but I have vulnerable neighbours for whom that may be a significant problem. There is so much collateral damaged created by this sort of attack against any company of sufficient size. It's easy to wave your hand and say they're a rich company they can afford it, but no company exists in isolation, they're all part of economies, and ultimately it's real people somewhere who take the damage.
    - BrianOnHN 5y ago
      Good luck getting much sympathy. There is still some asshole making off like a bandit even when the lowly employees get hurt at the same company.
- boomlinde 5y ago
  In this instance, they claim that they will not attack non-profits, which puts organizations like MSF out of harm's way.
anthony_r 5y ago
Let's inverse the question: please provide a list of companies that would be OK to target, according to you.
CleverLikeAnOx 5y ago
If a robber steals one grain of rice from each person in a town, was anyone harmed? If you think not, then what if a thousand robbers do the same? Leeching off of companies is kind of like stealing a grain of rice from everyone. The company's costs increase and the price eventually makes its way back to the consumer. Another way to think about it is the total amount of labor needed for the world to operate as it does. In a world that has no ransomware, the labor needed is X. In a world with ransomware it is X + cost of building ransomware + cost of dealing with ransomware.
- CharlesW 5y ago
  > Leeching off of companies is kind of like stealing a grain of rice from everyone. I'm sure the criminals console themselves by thinking about it that way, but as someone who had to use an emergency room and was denied other services during the month+ Scripps was down (during a global pandemic, no less), it was easy to see how ransomware attacks can directly hurt an enormous number of employees and customers.
  - CleverLikeAnOx 5y ago
    To clarify my point, even if leeching off companies is like stealing a grain of rice from each person, it is still wrong. My point was that ransomware is wrong even in an idealized abstract scenario where it only targets non-critical companies. Thanks for providing your experience. It drive home that in practice it is much more like beating and robbing many people than it is like stealing just a single grain of rice from them.
mcguire 5y ago
As a general rule, theft is considered a bad thing. Why do you think it's acceptable?

I find myself puzzled by organizations like these. Let's say they do not attack infrastructure or other critical services, and only leech off huge companies. I cannot argue against it?

jnorthrop 5y ago

Are you really intending to condone illegal activity? Just because their targeting "wealthy" companies? That is like condoning a mugger because he is working in a rich neighborhood and not targeting the impoverished.

everyone 5y ago
The rich people in that neighborhood have acquired their wealth in an unfair injust way.
typon 5y ago
If I heard news that Jeff Bezos bank account was hacked and $50 million dollars were stolen, I don't think I would even bat an eye. When I hear of ransomware shutting down hospital computers I'm furious and want to see these clowns rot in jail. There's clearly a spectrum here of where it starts becoming a heinous act.
- ohhhhhh 5y ago
  this is a you problem
- mcguire 5y ago
  The global median household wealth is about $7,500. The median income is around $10,000. To much of the world (making some assumptions based on your presence here on HN), you have more in common with Jeff than you do with much of the world; they might take the same attitude to you.
  - throwaway672000 5y ago
    It's possible the only reason we would disgree if the rest of the world took this attitude is our own greed. To me what's more obviously wrong whether I'm rich or poor is leaking personal info on employees, HR correspondence etc. I don't know whether this group would since they say it hasn't got that far yet but other groups have. Extortion, mugging, burglary etc are worse than the "perfect theft" where you move some numbers from one account to another. I wonder if the people involved believe their own spin that "your boss is the one at fault, would rather you suffer than pay"
trasz 5y ago
Bit of an advocatus diaboli, but… Crimes are crimes because they hurt people. Here we’re talking about just lowering company’s profits; same thing happens naturally due to market forces and nobody complains.
- TchoBeer 5y ago
  Usually lowering a company's profits due to market competition produces value. Just stealing money does not produce value.
  - trasz 5y ago
    The stolen money don’t have a value to the thief?
    - TchoBeer 5y ago
      The amount of value it produces for the theif is equal to the amount of value it takes away from the company
      - Hjfrf 5y ago
        Generally much less, if you're taking into account all the wasted time/energy.
        trasz 5y ago
        Million dollars stolen from, say, Bezos, is worth less than that to the thief?
        TchoBeer 5y ago
        We can have a discussion about ethics and utility if it's a starving person stealing from Jeff Bezos, but these ransomware firms are large-scale organizations just like the companies they're stealing from.
4gotunameagain 5y ago
I was looking for a solid argument, since I am not able to provide one. So far there are none presented here either. Are we really going to justify this just by "it is against the law"? So many things are against the law, so many ancient laws demonstrate the inability of humans to create the absolute corpus of ethical behaviours™.
- mcguire 5y ago
  Since you asked,... The Kantian categorical imperative goes something like, "act as if the basis of your actions would be made universal law." What happens if everyone conducts denial of service and ransom attacks against anyone they perceive as a legitimate target? https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/growing-threat-ransomware-attacks-hospitals https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/growing-threat-ransomware... https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-ruthless-cyber-gang-behind-the-hospital-ransomware-crisis-11623340215 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-ruthless-cyber-gang-behind-...
  - dcow 5y ago
    We'd probably have a society that is really good at building safe redundant software services such that this is no longer a threat (;
  - pope_meat 5y ago
    We'd love in the world that we live in now. Iran's centrifuges have some experience with that. I think it's kind of neat that we're waging war via bit flipping instead of meat flipping, let's call it progress.
- _manifold 5y ago
  The fact is that these particular situations are much more complex than a false dichotomy of "good" and "evil" corporations, or "large" and "small" corporations. Take any organization you think is "worthy" of being attacked in this manner, and consider all of the implications of such an attack. Think about the people inside the organization, and those outside of the organization that benefit from that its continued operations. I think it's fair to say the public opinion of oil companies is fairly low; however, arguably the biggest impact of the Colonial Pipeline attack was not on the executives running the company, but on the end customers of gas stations unable to fuel their vehicles due to the shortage (whether truly real or created by panic). I would argue that everyday workers unable to get to work or to the store to buy food is more important than a few executives not getting their bonuses or having their shares lose value. This isn't to say that these corporations are above all reproach and should be allowed to continued operating in whatever way they see fit simply because they have employees and customers are relying on them. But it's also the wrong mindset to think that it's OK to attack corporations in this way just because they "deserve it" in some way.

danpalmer 5y ago

> and only leech off huge companies. I cannot argue against it? Médecins Sans Frontières is a huge company. Their annual budget is around $1.6bn. Are you ok with them being subject to ransomware attacks?

rory 5y ago
Allegedly BlackMatter is not. > It would not extort healthcare, critical infrastructure, oil and gas, defense, non-profit, and government organizations
- danpalmer 5y ago
  That's good. I wonder if they'd extort the company that manages the building I live in. If they did the most likely negative outcomes are that I'll receive worse service and pay more for my service charge. That's not too bad for me, but I have vulnerable neighbours for whom that may be a significant problem. There is so much collateral damaged created by this sort of attack against any company of sufficient size. It's easy to wave your hand and say they're a rich company they can afford it, but no company exists in isolation, they're all part of economies, and ultimately it's real people somewhere who take the damage.
  - BrianOnHN 5y ago
    Good luck getting much sympathy. There is still some asshole making off like a bandit even when the lowly employees get hurt at the same company.
boomlinde 5y ago
In this instance, they claim that they will not attack non-profits, which puts organizations like MSF out of harm's way.

anthony_r 5y ago

Let's inverse the question: please provide a list of companies that would be OK to target, according to you.

CleverLikeAnOx 5y ago

If a robber steals one grain of rice from each person in a town, was anyone harmed? If you think not, then what if a thousand robbers do the same? Leeching off of companies is kind of like stealing a grain of rice from everyone. The company's costs increase and the price eventually makes its way back to the consumer. Another way to think about it is the total amount of labor needed for the world to operate as it does. In a world that has no ransomware, the labor needed is X. In a world with ransomware it is X + cost of building ransomware + cost of dealing with ransomware.

CharlesW 5y ago
> Leeching off of companies is kind of like stealing a grain of rice from everyone. I'm sure the criminals console themselves by thinking about it that way, but as someone who had to use an emergency room and was denied other services during the month+ Scripps was down (during a global pandemic, no less), it was easy to see how ransomware attacks can directly hurt an enormous number of employees and customers.
- CleverLikeAnOx 5y ago
  To clarify my point, even if leeching off companies is like stealing a grain of rice from each person, it is still wrong. My point was that ransomware is wrong even in an idealized abstract scenario where it only targets non-critical companies. Thanks for providing your experience. It drive home that in practice it is much more like beating and robbing many people than it is like stealing just a single grain of rice from them.

mcguire 5y ago

As a general rule, theft is considered a bad thing. Why do you think it's acceptable?