Reports of IT incidents from public companies tend to be obscure, vague, missing or technically true but misleading but they almost universally stop short of ou

Reports of IT incidents from public companies tend to be obscure, vague, missing or technically true but misleading but they almost universally stop short of outright lying (mainly because for public company officers lying to shareholders i.e. the general public has harsher personal risks&consequences than the company losing lots of money or even shutting down; being incompetent is completely legal but lying to your shareholders about material aspects of company finances is a crime and also makes them personally financially liable), so if they say that they have seen no evidence of an external intrusion, then I would presume that it's definitely not ransomware, where signs of external intrusion - namely, the ransom demand - would be obvious and undeniable. Perhaps (though IMHO not that likely) it may be some other kind of attack e.g. one intended to secretly steal customer data, which does not give signs of external intrusion if the company doesn't look for them much (and it might have motivation to not look very hard), but if it was ransomware, I'm quite sure they would not say what they said.