4 ms·

No. I can’t believe this needs to be explained, but the two situations are remarkably alike. If all of a corporations data is being held to ransom, there is no

No. I can’t believe this needs to be explained, but the two situations are remarkably alike. If all of a corporations data is being held to ransom, there is no choice in the matter, they must pay. You’re talking like losing all their customers or IP or shutting down the corporation wouldn’t hurt anyone but it would hurt all their employees at the least. What such an idiotic, short sighted policy would do is to encourage corporations to pay the ransom in secret. This only strengthens the hackers because now law enforcement has no idea who is being hit, when, and with what malware.

gopher_space 5y ago
If "all" of your data is being held to ransom and that will tank your company then you are a bad businessperson and deserve whatever you get. Right now it's apparently cheaper to pay a ransom than it is to implement sane security and backup procedures. That needs to end.
- camjohnson26 5y ago
  That would be true if it was possible for any company to have perfect processes, but that’s not the case. Companies are run by real people with real flaws and a perfect system doesn’t exist.
- codegeek 5y ago
  That's like saying "Right now it's cheaper to not have locks so lets punish the homeowners who don't lock their doors instead of punishing the thieves and robbers" Yes, security and backup measures are critical and companies SHOULD be scrutinized for those things especially if you deal with mission critical data/information. But that has nothing to do with Ransomware Gangs.
- WalterBright 5y ago
  I thought we were done with blaming the victim.
  - gopher_space 5y ago
    Disaster recovery plans are very common. Their plan for this disaster was to pay the ransom, thus perpetuating the cycle.
spywaregorilla 5y ago
Many ransom payments don't even release the ransom. If paying in secret is a crime, with whistleblower opportunities, then paying in secret is not so easy. Forbidding payments will massively decrease the value of doing the attacks and reduce the number of them.
jonas21 5y ago
Additionally, ransomware attackers frequently target hospitals because they know the issue can literally be a matter of life and death [1]. [1] https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/growing-threat-ransomware-attacks-hospitals https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/growing-threat-ransomware...
BeFlatXIII 5y ago
Then a bunch of employees will have to find new jobs and some people have their retirement savings drained because it was illegal to pay the ransom and the business shut down. Society will move on. No long-term loss.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- freedomben 5y ago
  Dang man, that is amazingly cold.
  - BeFlatXIII 5y ago
    Here are two representative arguments that I got sick of hearing and pushed me into the negative Kelvin: 1. Green energy requires too few employees per gigawatt compared to coal 2. It would be irresponsible to pursue a policy of a sharp correction toward affordable housing prices because it would push too many elderly into poverty
- perl4ever 5y ago
  That's like a 40,000 foot perspective. As a sibling comment says, what about hospitals? The total value of the stock markets didn't seem to suffer from Covid-19. But people have. Maybe your point is that unrestricted ransomware shouldn't affect GDP? I'm honestly not sure. Doesn't there have to be a limit? Civilization depends on trust. Sometimes there are critical points.
- true_religion 5y ago
  The same can be said for highway robbery. It happens in my country and people say well it’s just a tax you have to pay for taking that road. Since the victims are businesses handling goods, the robbery fee is priced into imports and we all pay extra. It can’t be priced into exports because we are too negligible of an exporter, so instead workers in that industry are paid less and there is less money left over to invest so our growth lags behind other counties. Overall the whole country suffers, all because of a few thousand bandits sitting in the forest near the border. But hey… our society moved on, so you’re right about that: you can definitely live with it.
perl4ever 5y ago
"If all of a corporations data is being held to ransom, there is no choice in the matter, they must pay" This sounds reasonable at first, but I think it might be leaning on anthropomorphizing a corporation a little much. I think of them more as a machine, or a biological cell or microbe. While it may be a machine optimized for survival, I'm not sure that they all are or that they must be. An organism can self-destruct if that's what it's programmed to do. And an organization in theory should be able to maintain processes that result in orderly self-destruction in certain circumstances, where it's appropriate in the wider society. After all, companies typically go bankrupt rather than devolving into gang warfare, right? A "humans first" society should not be prioritizing the survival of human created organizations above all else.

gopher_space 5y ago

If "all" of your data is being held to ransom and that will tank your company then you are a bad businessperson and deserve whatever you get. Right now it's apparently cheaper to pay a ransom than it is to implement sane security and backup procedures. That needs to end.

camjohnson26 5y ago
That would be true if it was possible for any company to have perfect processes, but that’s not the case. Companies are run by real people with real flaws and a perfect system doesn’t exist.
codegeek 5y ago
That's like saying "Right now it's cheaper to not have locks so lets punish the homeowners who don't lock their doors instead of punishing the thieves and robbers" Yes, security and backup measures are critical and companies SHOULD be scrutinized for those things especially if you deal with mission critical data/information. But that has nothing to do with Ransomware Gangs.
WalterBright 5y ago
I thought we were done with blaming the victim.
- gopher_space 5y ago
  Disaster recovery plans are very common. Their plan for this disaster was to pay the ransom, thus perpetuating the cycle.

spywaregorilla 5y ago

Many ransom payments don't even release the ransom. If paying in secret is a crime, with whistleblower opportunities, then paying in secret is not so easy. Forbidding payments will massively decrease the value of doing the attacks and reduce the number of them.

jonas21 5y ago

Additionally, ransomware attackers frequently target hospitals because they know the issue can literally be a matter of life and death [1]. [1] https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/growing-threat-ransomware-attacks-hospitals https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/growing-threat-ransomware...

BeFlatXIII 5y ago

Then a bunch of employees will have to find new jobs and some people have their retirement savings drained because it was illegal to pay the ransom and the business shut down. Society will move on. No long-term loss.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
freedomben 5y ago
Dang man, that is amazingly cold.
- BeFlatXIII 5y ago
  Here are two representative arguments that I got sick of hearing and pushed me into the negative Kelvin: 1. Green energy requires too few employees per gigawatt compared to coal 2. It would be irresponsible to pursue a policy of a sharp correction toward affordable housing prices because it would push too many elderly into poverty
perl4ever 5y ago
That's like a 40,000 foot perspective. As a sibling comment says, what about hospitals? The total value of the stock markets didn't seem to suffer from Covid-19. But people have. Maybe your point is that unrestricted ransomware shouldn't affect GDP? I'm honestly not sure. Doesn't there have to be a limit? Civilization depends on trust. Sometimes there are critical points.
true_religion 5y ago
The same can be said for highway robbery. It happens in my country and people say well it’s just a tax you have to pay for taking that road. Since the victims are businesses handling goods, the robbery fee is priced into imports and we all pay extra. It can’t be priced into exports because we are too negligible of an exporter, so instead workers in that industry are paid less and there is less money left over to invest so our growth lags behind other counties. Overall the whole country suffers, all because of a few thousand bandits sitting in the forest near the border. But hey… our society moved on, so you’re right about that: you can definitely live with it.

perl4ever 5y ago

"If all of a corporations data is being held to ransom, there is no choice in the matter, they must pay" This sounds reasonable at first, but I think it might be leaning on anthropomorphizing a corporation a little much. I think of them more as a machine, or a biological cell or microbe. While it may be a machine optimized for survival, I'm not sure that they all are or that they must be. An organism can self-destruct if that's what it's programmed to do. And an organization in theory should be able to maintain processes that result in orderly self-destruction in certain circumstances, where it's appropriate in the wider society. After all, companies typically go bankrupt rather than devolving into gang warfare, right? A "humans first" society should not be prioritizing the survival of human created organizations above all else.