San Francisco Metro System Hacked with Ransomware [Paid $70,000 in Bitcoin]

[SmartIphone]

To prevent any further ransomware I would highly suggest to use RansomFree here https://ransomfree.cybereason.com/
There is a demo how it works and it is the best app i ever seen to protect our selfs and here is the demo to see how it works  https://ransomfree.cybereason.com/demo/

Recently the San Francisco Metro System got Hacked with Ransomware resulting in free rides.

It is yet not clear exactly who was responsible for the attack (besides a pseudonym "Andy Saolis"), but according to local media reports, the agency's computers were being held by ransomware until the MUNI paid the equivalent of more than $73,000 in Bitcoin.

What do you think guys?
Isn't it bad for the bitcoin to be known as a bad thing in our lives?
*If it was posted before move to the correct board.

[Yogafan00000]

It's funny that it's hackers who are forcing mainstream to adopt crypto at virtual gunpoint.

[BitcoinBarrel]

Why would you pay the $70,000? Morons, what if they are lying and you are still hacked after paying?

[chixka000]

If this is true then this is really bad for bitcoin users, but it would only be fatal users from san francisco. Well, this would only happen if the government would act. Unless this is a dumbass for them to consider this as a waste of time then probably nothing would really happen to bitcoin users from san fran.

[shorena]

Why would you pay the $70,000? Morons, what if they are lying and you are still hacked after paying?

Ransomware make it usually pretty obvious that the system is compromised. Like with encrypting all the data and showing you a big flashy prompt that you need to pay XY BTC to get the decryption key.

[SmartIphone]

It's funny that it's hackers who are forcing mainstream to adopt crypto at virtual gunpoint.

But in this way it is not good.

Why would you pay the $70,000? Morons, what if they are lying and you are still hacked after paying?

I haven't paid but the San Francisco Metro System institution paid because there was no other way to fix what happened.
Work or not you have to pay if you want to get back the files.

[Red-Apple]

Why would you pay the $70,000? Morons, what if they are lying and you are still hacked after paying?

I haven't paid but the San Francisco Metro System institution paid because there was no other way to fix what happened.
Work or not you have to pay if you want to get back the files.

hmm funny i always though US laws didn't allow them to pay any kind of ransom to hackers!

besides didn't they already break some of the code that ransomeware uses, i remember reading on reddit that it is possible to decrypt those files, maybe it was a certain type of ransomeware.

[SmartIphone]

Why would you pay the $70,000? Morons, what if they are lying and you are still hacked after paying?

I haven't paid but the San Francisco Metro System institution paid because there was no other way to fix what happened.
Work or not you have to pay if you want to get back the files.

hmm funny i always though US laws didn't allow them to pay any kind of ransom to hackers!

besides didn't they already break some of the code that ransomeware uses, i remember reading on reddit that it is possible to decrypt those files, maybe it was a certain type of ransomeware.

There are some places like nomoreransom.org/crypto-sheriff.php and noransom.kaspersky.com
But maybe this ransomware was a new one or more complicated, I haven't heard about that law you are talking about.

[Yakamoto]

I'm actually kind of surprised that they managed to get a ransomware virus into the SF metro system without it being some kind of inside job. I could be wrong, but it seems kind of weird that such a system would be exposed like that.

It was probably in their best interest to pay the ransom and get their data back, but they should spend some time and figure out what went wrong first.

[SmartIphone]

I'm actually kind of surprised that they managed to get a ransomware virus into the SF metro system without it being some kind of inside job. I could be wrong, but it seems kind of weird that such a system would be exposed like that.

It was probably in their best interest to pay the ransom and get their data back, but they should spend some time and figure out what went wrong first.

It is supposed that someone inside has downloaded something or have clicked on an executable program from emails.
I think that the lesson has been learned so they can see what was wrong and prevent this in the future.

[Lucius]

Recently the San Francisco Metro System got Hacked with Ransomware resulting in free rides.

It is yet not clear exactly who was responsible for the attack (besides a pseudonym "Andy Saolis"), but according to local media reports, the agency's computers were being held by ransomware until the MUNI paid the equivalent of more than $73,000 in Bitcoin.

What do you think guys?
Isn't it bad for the bitcoin to be known as a bad thing in our lives?
*If it was posted before move to the correct board.

Those who make such malicious programs targeted large systems like SF Metro System,it is much easier to get ransom from them but from small users.Some wonder why they paid and answer is simple.,They need files back and they did not have a backup,which would save them from paying ransom.

Some older versions of ransomware can be decrypted,but for new version only help is to have backup or to pay.

It is bad for BTC when such news go in public,but there is nothing we can do right now.People should keep an eye on what they click and make regular backup of important files.

[DimensionZ]

So the hackers gave the people of San Fran free metro rides lol that's hilarious. It's not strange they decided to proceed with paying the ransom because they would have incurred a lot more losses in running costs over the period of not getting any profit from tickets. Some dude on a late night shift was prolly checking some shady sites and got a present in the meantime

[SmartIphone]

Those who make such malicious programs targeted large systems like SF Metro System,it is much easier to get ransom from them but from small users.Some wonder why they paid and answer is simple.,They need files back and they did not have a backup,which would save them from paying ransom.

Some older versions of ransomware can be decrypted,but for new version only help is to have backup or to pay.

It is bad for BTC when such news go in public,but there is nothing we can do right now.People should keep an eye on what they click and make regular backup of important files.

It ecrypt the whole system and the MBRs to prevent systems from booting up properly but there is only a loss on tickets nothing huge.
But this caused them to shut down ticket kiosks and make rides free this weekend.
Overall this is not good for bitcoin because bitcoin is getting popular in a negative way not as something useful and positive.

[~Bitcoin~]

Yeah certainly things like this can make government to think twice before accepting bitcoin or allowing bitcoin trading business within country. Anonymity of bitcoin have also created several problems like this, that hacker can run away without being detected. However san francisco metro system seems to be more responsible for not having better security in their systems rather than bitcoin being payment method for hacker.

[Ayers]

don't tell me that they opened "that" email once again, like a bunch of moron, it's again not bitcoin fault but only their fault to be idiot, those same hacker can steal your credit card credentials easily, never head of skimming? but no one accuses the fiat system for this

[Milkduds]

The way some of these organizations react to hacking,tells me they are way in over their heads. Shutting down all the terminals, shows that they think they can stop the spread,not realizing he already had control. Bitcoin is just to easy to use and hackers tend to know the latest tech on the scene.

[MingLee]

How did they manage to let ransomware into the San Fran metro system? It's just so unbelievable that something like that could happen without some super gross negligence on some employee's part.

They're lucky that the ransomware actually did go and decrypt their files, but at the same time the $70,000 was probably low enough that the designer didn't think that it would be worth screwing the people that paid him. Good on them for that portion.

[BuySomeBitcoins]

They should feel relieved by the hack

They are aware of the security holes their system have
They paid a heavy price for a hacker instead of invested in cyber-security - most US companies ignore the risks
It was not a terrorist cyber attack that could have been worse.

[chesatochi]

Personally, I would not have paid 70000$ in bitcoin because you encourage people to continue this unethical way to commit a crime in exchange for a compensation. I think is very important companies take the securities very seriously or otherwise you will see another news like that on the internet. Do you think the clients will be happy to hear that the company hacked...

[Kprawn]

It is bad for Bitcoin. We had visitors last week, and the husband did not know that I am a Bitcoin enthusiast. He started to tell me that he lost

all his Holiday videos and pics, due to some virus that blocked his files and then they wanted.. "something called Bitcoin" to unlock his files. I

sat their red faces, because he blamed this "Bitcoin" technology for what happened to him. I explained to him what Bitcoin was, and that the

technology was not to be blamed for the hack, but he did not want to hear anything about Bitcoin, because he blamed it for his loss.