Slashdot Mirror
Pro-Privacy Webmail ProtonMail Pays Ransom, But Hit By DDoS Attack Anyway (wordpress.com)
An anonymous reader writes: The new pro-privacy, pro-encryption webmail service ProtonMail has been under a sustained DDoS attack since November 3. They received a ransom demand a few days ago, along with a brief demonstration of how effective the DDoS attack was. They were advised to pay the ransom, and they complied. Unfortunately, the attackers launched the DDoS anyway. Here's a quote from their press release:
"Through MELANI (a division of the Swiss federal government), we exchanged information with other companies who have also been attacked and made a few discoveries. First, the attack against ProtonMail can be divided into two stages. The first stage is the volumetric attack which was targeting just our IP addresses. The second stage is the more complex attack which targeted weak points in the infrastructure of our ISPs. This second phase has not been observed in any other recent attacks on Swiss companies and was technically much more sophisticated. This means that ProtonMail is likely under attack by two separate groups, with the second attackers exhibiting capabilities more commonly possessed by state-sponsored actors. It also shows that the second attackers were not afraid of causing massive collateral damage in order to get at us."
"Through MELANI (a division of the Swiss federal government), we exchanged information with other companies who have also been attacked and made a few discoveries. First, the attack against ProtonMail can be divided into two stages. The first stage is the volumetric attack which was targeting just our IP addresses. The second stage is the more complex attack which targeted weak points in the infrastructure of our ISPs. This second phase has not been observed in any other recent attacks on Swiss companies and was technically much more sophisticated. This means that ProtonMail is likely under attack by two separate groups, with the second attackers exhibiting capabilities more commonly possessed by state-sponsored actors. It also shows that the second attackers were not afraid of causing massive collateral damage in order to get at us."
The attackers want to thank all the people who are too stupid and lazy to protect their machines against being part of a botnet. Without your aid, this would not have been possible.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
-- Robert Goodloe Harper
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
I'm not sure who told them that the best plan was to attempt to pay criminals not to be... well, criminals. Call Law enforcement, and make arrangements with companies that mitigate these attacks? Absolutely, and the latter may cost a few bucks. But paying out a blackmail threat is about as foolish as it gets.
Hell, even small time crimes rarely benefit from appeasing a threat. Plenty of people have given an attacker cash on demand, only to find themselves waking up in a hospital few hours later missing their belongings and a few teeth. The most unlucky of that bunch ended up raped, or dead.
Never trust a criminal! If their morality allows them to bend you over once, somehow believing they won't do it twice is completely irrational.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
I'm not sure who told them that the best plan was to attempt to pay criminals not to be... well, criminals. Call Law enforcement, and make arrangements with companies that mitigate these attacks? Absolutely, and the latter may cost a few bucks. But paying out a blackmail threat is about as foolish as it gets.
Hell, even small time crimes rarely benefit from appeasing a threat. Plenty of people have given an attacker cash on demand, only to find themselves waking up in a hospital few hours later missing their belongings and a few teeth. The most unlucky of that bunch ended up raped, or dead.
Never trust a criminal! If their morality allows them to bend you over once, somehow believing they won't do it twice is completely irrational.
It's about incentives. If the criminal fails to honor the payment too much, people stop paying. The amount of harm to the company also goes up, as does the interest of major law enforcement task forces. That's why ransomware operators send you keys and private corporations are frequently willing to pay ransoms. But people with a major presence whose operations will be strongly hurt by allowing criminal operations to continue--most obviously the United States Government when dealing with terrorism--are much less likely to pay.
As a protonmail user it's been nail-biting experience over the last few days.
Protonmail was hit by state sponsored attacks disguised as BC ransom.
Please consider donating.
Thank you.
See Kipling on this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danegeld
. Dummies.
Silence is a state of mime.
There is nothing to say on the matter of ransom ware that Rudyard Kipling hasn't already said, with greater eloquence than I could muster. To reference another great saying, "millions for defense, not one penny for tribute".
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Lots of comments here about the foolishness of paying off criminals. Indeed. But in fact I tip my hat to ProtonMail for their clever strategy for illuminating the likely identity of their attackers. The thing is, when you pay off blackmailers they typically don't then carry through with the initial threat because that's bad business. They may make further demands based on their new knowledge of you being an easy mark, but to carry out the initially threatened action after being paid simply sends the message to you and other potential targets that paying is a waste of money because the threat will be carried out anyway. The profile of the target (encrypted email service) alone combined with analysis of the second attack as having the hallmarks of a state actor would suggest a three-letter agency. The fact that they got hit after paying just clinches it.
This sets a precedent now so everyone knows not to pay hostage money to people that threaten DDOS attacks as they don't follow through honorably.
The problem with slashdot is that most of its users were bullied and stuffed into lockers as kids!
The self-righteousness of slashdot know-it-alls sucks.
Protonmail made it quite clear, the ISP and carrier made them pay after the whole datacenter with hundreds of other customers went down. It's not like they did not know that you should not pay. But if you are close to being put out on the street, you reassess your policies.
DDoS protection against this size of attack is expensive and it is obvious that a provider of secure email can not simply hand out the ssl key to a CDN. If you want to make sure the next attack is hit with the visor down and the defense in place, then go and support their defense fund, so they are no longer tempted to pay.
They didn't just decide to pay the ransom of their own volition. They were pressured into it by third parties who were suffering major economic losses due to the attack. Their ISP was basically taken offline, along with all of their other business customers.
Look at it, for it's as close as you'll ever get to it.
I'm not going to pay you. Instead, this money goes to whoever brings me your head. I don't care what he does with the rest. I only need your head.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
and its lackeys most likely behind this. The typical cyber-criminals are pro-privacy, while the U.S gov is the fiercest opponent to it.
Never pay ransom.Never pay bribes. Never pay blackmailers. You are honest. They are not. You have no guarantee they will do what they say, they will use your honesty and your reputation against you to continue to suck even more money out of you. You will also make the list of targets who will pay, and will be hit again and again.
Charities and Volunteer organizations also use the same tactics.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
I've just mugged you for your wallet.
"Give me your phone and I'll give you your wallet back."
Yeah. Right.