Bitcoin Forum

How Ransomware Became a Billion-Dollar Nightmare for Businesses
One cybersecurity firm estimates that extortive attacks now cost small and medium companies at least $75 billion in expenses and lost productivity each year.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/09/ransomware-us/498602/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/09/ransomware-us/498602/)


Wondering when this issue hits critical mass. 

Okay, all of that is caused by fakin encrypt Ransome.


And so the bank is changed their mind for believing with bitcoins? ??? but keeping in bitcoin, I'm if that is the best way for securing their money.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Well they keep mentioning that these companies get infected by executable email attachments, but it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of these are inside jobs.  Ransomware can be bought easily, and then all you have to do is put in your btc address and load it surreptitiously into your companies computers.  I bet even IT guys get in on the action.  Hard to see how this ends.

I predict that the next financial crisis will be caused by hackers hacking in the banking network and cause chaos by installing malware, planting viruses and other stuff they can do to subvert the whole system. Kinda like Mr. Robot but did you guys know that Bangladesh's central bank was hacked a few months ago with the hackers stealing millions? It could have been billions if not for the hacker's mistake.

There was an inside job that partly made that hack successful and how many disgruntled employees with the technical capability to assist the hackers today? I assume there is quite a lot.

The reality of the world will always beat that which you desire, banks without a doubt don´t want bitcoin to gain traction, but the reality whether they like it or not is that bitcoin is here to stay, so even though these are unlawful actions, they serve the purpose to remind the banks… Bitcoin is here and there is nothing you can do to stop it.

If this is such a huge problem, why are we not seeing law enforcement coming down hard on these so-called hackers? It is not that hard to track these transactions, when you subpoena companies to release the information. This includes the mixer services that are used to hide the tx history.

How much of this information provided here are real, is the other question. ^hmmmm^

This is a bit of a red herring, to be honest. I am virtually certain that the first of a series of arrests will be made soon, underscoring that BTC's pseudonymity is really not all that...

That's the point, because it is hard to find the hackers.  That's a primary reason ransomware has become so rampant.  You do understand that police departments have themselves been forced to pay to have their files unencrypted, right?

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ransomware-hackers-blackmail-u-s-police-departments-n561746 (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ransomware-hackers-blackmail-u-s-police-departments-n561746)

And you think they are going to subpoena places like BTC-e and get info? lol, good luck with that ::)


I don't think a series of arrests will stop it at this point.  Too many people involved.  IMO much more likely eventually legislators lean on law enforcement and exchanges/sites start getting seized and shut down. 

Cryptolockers are definitely a shady way to profit from a botnet. Not only because you make them pay for something they shouldn't, but also because it's affect everyone, rich and poor.

But i think we is already having a way for fixing the cryptolockers but the problem is not all of the encrypt ransome is linked into cryptolocker and the various ransome is make confused for the way for fix that, and the best way in this time just backuping your data before. for me the main problem is "A LOT OF THE TYPE OF RANSOME".  :-\

Working at a cloud hosted desktop provider and seeing ransomware every once in a while, we just restore the VM. Most of the stuff gets spread by fresh email spam chains often abusing the fact that a company doesn't use SPF.

Banks (and maybe a significant number of other institutions) keeping Bitcoin in stock in case of an an attack means that banks pay the ransom instead of implementing appropriate security measures. By paying the ransom they are actively promoting these kinds of crime. It also sheds a very bad light on the security practice of institutions that are still responsible in handling the vast majority of financial dealings of the economy. An effective remedy against ransomware is pretty simple: Regular backups. Is it too much to ask that institutions that regard themselves as professional at the very least implement a regular backup plan?

Of course there is no 100% secure way to get rid of trojans. I think we have to live with it. However there is huge improvement potential by educating users to be more careful when downloading and opening e-mail attachments...

ya.ya.yo!