Maze Hackers Publish Texas Law Firm's Confidential Data
A spate of recent cyberattacks has targeted at least five small law firms in three states.
February 11, 2020 at 09:44 AM
4 minute read
UPDATE: The hacker group Maze has re-listed the Texas law firm Baker Wotring on its site under the heading "full dump" and has now released the firm's data. The data includes pain diaries from personal injury cases, fee agreements, HIPPA consent forms and more. Baker Wotring once again declined to return requests for comment. Maze had taken Baker Wotring's name off its list late last week, leading to the conclusion that the firm paid the hacker's ransom. The republishing of the firm name and the data dump suggest otherwise.
Maze, the ransomware software and hacking group, has removed Texas law firm Baker Wotring from its "client" site, signaling that the 10-lawyer litigation firm may have opted to pay cybercriminals to halt publication of potentially sensitive data.
The firm was put on Maze's public target list on Nov. 29 and had remained there until late last week. Baker Wotring did not respond to multiple requests for comment, though it previously acknowledged a breach.
Maze's willingness to expose its targets' data has alarmed cybersecurity experts. After using its ransomware to gain control of a target's data, the group publishes the name of the company or law firm to a hosted site. At least five small law firms appear to have fallen victim to the group since last month.
If a target doesn't concede to the group's demands—previous victims were asked to pay in the $1-2 million range—Maze may release a sample of stolen data as proof of the hack and a further incentive. If the mark does pay, the hackers say they will then release the data and take the company's name off the public site.
Brett Callow, a cybersecurity specialist who has been tracking Maze, said that, while a payment may lead to a target being delisted, there is no way to know for certain if the hackers will stick to their word and not release the data at another date.
It's not clear whether Houston-based Baker Wotring firm paid to have its name removed from the site or whether the hack was formally reported.
"I see Baker Wotring is no longer named on the website, which probably means they paid to be delisted and for a pinky promise that the group's copies of the stolen data would be deleted," Callow said in an email. "In a previous case, the group asked for two amounts: $1 million for decrypting the victims' data and $1 million for destroying the data they had stolen."
An ALM investigation last year reviewing state-reported law firm breaches showed that hundreds of firms, large and small, had quietly reported breaches of varying magnitudes in recent years. Callow estimates that only 10-20% percent of breaches are reported.
According to Callow and Michael Maschke, CEO of Virginia-based digital forensics firm Sensei Enterprises, many hacking victims will avoid disclosing breaches in order to sidestep the potential fallout from clients.
Maschke said that his firm advises clients not to pay the ransom, but added that Maze brings a new calculus into the ransomware game.
"Maze is one of the first that exfiltrates the data," Maschke said. "Before, you had a 50/50 shot of getting the encryption key and freeing the data, but now that they are taking the data offsite, there are more concerns."
Maschke said that he couldn't think of any reason Maze would have taken Baker Wotring's name off its list unless it was paid to do it.
Texas, like many other states, has relatively weak data breach reporting requirements, and it is often at the discretion of the hacked entity as to whether to disclose an incident.
Another Texas firm, Irving-based Schachter & Harris, informed the Office of the Attorney General of Maryland as well as the Office of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation of Massachusetts of an attack in 2017. The firm sent a letter describing the incident as well as the demands the hackers made around its data. In this instance, the hackers held the data hostage and demanded payment for its release.
The firm stated at that time that it had not paid the hackers. Representatives did not respond to a request for comment.
Read More
Law Firm Cybersecurity: See Which Firms Reported a Data Breach
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All12-Partner Team 'Surprises' Atlanta Firm’s Leaders With Exit to Launch New Reed Smith Office
4 minute readAfter Breakaway From FisherBroyles, Pierson Ferdinand Bills $75M in First Year
5 minute readWells Fargo and Bank of America Agree to Pay Combined $60 Million to Settle SEC Probe
Trending Stories
- 1How ‘Bilateral Tapping’ Can Help with Stress and Anxiety
- 2How Law Firms Can Make Business Services a Performance Champion
- 3'Digital Mindset': Hogan Lovells' New Global Managing Partner for Digitalization
- 4Silk Road Founder Ross Ulbricht Has New York Sentence Pardoned by Trump
- 5Settlement Allows Spouses of U.S. Citizens to Reopen Removal Proceedings
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250