Cyber Ransoms: Mr. Smith Attacks HBO's Loot Train
Thomas G. Rohback and Brooke Oppenheimer write: The recent cyber-attack on HBO should be a wakeup call to both businesses and insurers. While the amount sought by the hackers called "Mr. Smith"—roughly $6 million in bitcoin—is not a huge amount for HBO, it is significantly more than the amounts that have typically been demanded in recent cyber extortion demands.
August 29, 2017 at 12:00 AM
15 minute read
The recent cyber-attack on HBO should be a wakeup call to both businesses and insurers. While the amount sought by the hackers called “Mr. Smith”—roughly $6 million in bitcoin—is not a huge amount for HBO, it is significantly more than the amounts that have typically been demanded in recent cyber extortion demands. Over the last two years, the average ransom amount demanded in ransomware attacks was only between $100 and $2,000. Accordingly, approximately 70 percent of all ransomware demands have been paid. Datto, “Datto's State of the Channel Ransomware Report” (2016).
While underwriting for many aspects of cyber insurance faces significant challenges—particularly since many data breach cases and claims thus far have foundered on the lack of standing or actual damages where personally identifiable information (PII) has been accessed but not used—ransomware attacks have been substantially under-reported. Id. Ransomware attacks involve introducing a software into a company's computer system that allows data to be temporarily encrypted (and made unusable) until a ransom demand is paid. Absent faulty technology (or fake ransomware), the data is typically only exfiltrated, deleted or destroyed if the ransom demand is not met.
In the past two years, the volume of ransomware-infected email has increased by 6,000 percent resulting in more than 1.5 million systems being infected with ransomware. Limor Kessem, “Ransomware: How Consumers and businesses value their data,” IBM Security (Dec. 14, 2016). But the relatively modest ransom prices have been quickly paid, thereby making this payment appear more like a cost of doing business rather than an event requiring an insurance claim to be filed.
This content has been archived.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
© 2024 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 AllThe Kids Online Safety Act Threatens Free Speech and Opens the Door to Political Weaponization
6 minute readNew Cybersecurity Regulations are Here. This Is What You Need to Know.
5 minute readThe Challenge of AI Governance: The Blessing and the Curse of Safeguarding Personal Data
13 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Commission Confirms Three of Newsom's Appellate Court Picks
- 2Judge Grants Special Counsel's Motion, Dismisses Criminal Case Against Trump Without Prejudice
- 3GEICO, Travelers to Pay NY $11.3M for Cybersecurity Breaches
- 4'Professional Misconduct': Maryland Supreme Court Disbars 86-Year-Old Attorney
- 5Capital Markets Partners Expect IPO Resurgence During Trump Administration
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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