Victims Aren't Reporting Ransomware Attacks, FBI Report Concludes (bleepingcomputer.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Victims Aren't Reporting Ransomware Attacks, FBI Report Concludes (bleepingcomputer.com)

Posted by msmash on Friday June 23, 2017 @07:20AM from the what's-happening dept.

Catalin Cimpanu, writing for BleepingComputer: Despite being an expanding threat, ransomware infections are rarely reported to law enforcement agencies, according to conclusions from the 2016 Internet Crime Report (PDF), released yesterday by the FBI's Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3). During 2016, FBI IC3 officials said they received only 2,673 complaints regarding ransomware incidents, which ranked ransomware as the 22nd most reported cyber-crime in the US, having caused just over $2.4 million in damages (ranked 25th). The numbers are ridiculously small compared to what happens in the real world, where ransomware is one of today's most prevalent cyber-threats, according to multiple reports from cyber-security companies.

87 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Big surprise: by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 07:24 · Score: 1

Companies don't want outsiders to know that they have incompetent IT folk working for them. Or... they don't want people to know that they can't afford (or have chosen not) to upgrade their equipment and software. Or... they don't want people to know that management is incompetent.
1. Re:Big surprise: by Thud457 · 2017-06-23 07:41 · Score: 1
  
  "SEE?!
  We TOLD you encryption was a problem!"
  
  --
  the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
2. Re:Big surprise: by ShanghaiBill · 2017-06-23 07:47 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Or they know that government agencies will provide zero help in solving their problem.
3. Re:Big surprise: by geekmux · 2017-06-23 07:56 · Score: 2
  
  Companies don't want outsiders to know that they have incompetent users working for them...
  FTFY, since it's no secret who is responsible for infections 99.99% of the time.
4. Re:Big surprise: by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 08:18 · Score: 0
  
  Or they know that government agencies will prosecute them for failing to protect customer information... and provide zero help in solving their problem.
5. Re:Big surprise: by edtice1559 · 2017-06-23 08:23 · Score: 1
  
  And also prosecute them if they pay the ransom!
6. Re:Big surprise: by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 08:32 · Score: 1
  
  In my experience, less than zero: they will be an active hindrance.
  Which would you rather do, just restore from backup, install whatever patches you missed, and send everyone to training, or lock down all your computers until the FBI can get around to copying them for evidence in a few weeks?
  The FBI's problem is that every knows that getting them involved not only wouldn't help, it would make things worse.
7. Re:Big surprise: by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 09:30 · Score: 1
  
  If you bought Bitcoin at $0.10 per BTC, you'd look at a "Please pay us $300 in Bitcoins" and laugh as you proceed to give them what costed you less than 1 cent years ago.
  I think the real lesson here is: buy Bitcoin now, laugh at everyone in a few years.
8. Re:Big surprise: by Zero__Kelvin · 2017-06-23 09:54 · Score: 2
  
  $300 is $300 not $0.10
  
  It is immaterial what they cost originally. It is pretty evident you have no understanding of wealth and money. Most rich people became rich and / or stay rich because they don't look at it the way you claim you do.
  
  --
  Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
9. Re: Big surprise: by thundercattt · 2017-06-23 09:56 · Score: 1
  
  That's exactly it. Whoever you report it to goes "o well, it's from another country. Can't do anything about it". So why report it, suck it up and then install Linux.
10. Re:Big surprise: by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 10:56 · Score: 1
  
  In particular, they don't want outsiders to know they're so incompetent they don't even have backups.
  Seriously, you don't need good security to thwart ransomware. Just restore from backup! Plain old backup that has been around long before we connected stuff to the internet. Back then, it protected us from disk & server failures. And knuckleheads with too much privilege deleting files.
  Good security is to secure uptime & thwart spies. That is an arms race. Foiling ransomware is too easy.
11. Re: Big surprise: by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 12:42 · Score: 0
  
  I report stuff all the time. The FBI can't hear!!!
12. Re:Big surprise: by davester666 · 2017-06-23 19:42 · Score: 1
  
  and they know there is fuck-all that the FBI can do about it.
  The FBI won't be able to decrypt the computers and will want them for evidence, making it more time consuming and expensive to get back to work.
  It's like walking around a corner and being sucker-punched by someone, and while you are on the ground, you see a cop out of the corner of your eye, you call out "Can you give me a hand up.", and the cop steps on your hand and replies "Not yet, I'm busy collecting evidence."
  
  --
  Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
No surprise by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 07:26 · Score: 0

Is anyone surprised by this? I wouldn't report it either because I would assume that law enforcement/FBI would just ignore me, or do nothing with the report.
1. Re:No surprise by tattood · 2017-06-23 07:29 · Score: 1
  
  Or you are worried that their investigation might uncover other unrelated things that you would rather them not know about.
  
  --
  WTB [sig], PST!!!
Of course they aren't by Alan+Shutko · 2017-06-23 07:27 · Score: 2

Law enforcement isn't going to do anything to help you about ransomware hitting your computer. For the victim, it's a waste of time.
1. Re:Of course they aren't by bodog · 2017-06-23 07:30 · Score: 1
  
  "Law enforcement isn't going to do anything to help you about ransomware hitting your computer. For the victim, it's a waste of time."
  Patently false. The fully appropriate "whata moron" shrug of the LEO eyebrows should be more than enough to dissuade repeat events.
2. Re:Of course they aren't by tattood · 2017-06-23 07:32 · Score: 1
  
  It's not law enforcement's job to help you recover your data. Their job is to arrest the people who did it, which is equally, if not more, difficult to do.
  
  --
  WTB [sig], PST!!!
3. Re:Of course they aren't by Alan+Shutko · 2017-06-23 07:36 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  How likely is it that they will catch the people who did it? And if they do, how likely is that to reduce the chances of someone else doing the same thing?
  If someone steals your car, you contact the cops because it's possible you'll get your car back. Even if not, it's sort of possible they'll find the car thief, because the city is only so big. But finding who put ransomware on your computer among billions of people all over the world?
  Again, there's nothing in it for the victim.
4. Re:Of course they aren't by geekmux · 2017-06-23 07:41 · Score: 2
  
  Law enforcement isn't going to do anything to help you about ransomware hitting your computer. For the victim, it's a waste of time.
  Ever consider the possibility that the cybercrime division actually could help by guiding an unknowing victim to available solutions to recover data instead of them blindly assuming all is lost and prematurely formatting hard drives?
  Let's not act like ransomware key recovery is some mythical event that's never happened before, or assume that every victim is aware of its existence.
5. Re:Of course they aren't by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 07:54 · Score: 1
  
  I did consider it for a moment, and then I laughed my ass off.
6. Re:Of course they aren't by ShanghaiBill · 2017-06-23 07:59 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Ever consider the possibility that the cybercrime division actually could help
  No. I was actually involved in a criminal case involving the FBI's cybercrime unit, and I would not even consider the possibility that they could figure out how to turn a computer on. I never met a group of more clueless people. The guy leading the investigation had been a history major in college, and had made no effort whatsoever to learn anything about technology. His subordinates were even dumber.
  Disclaimer: I was not the target of the investigation. The FBI contacted me because I had previously won a civil suit against the perp, and knew a lot about his business practices.
7. Re:Of course they aren't by Holi · 2017-06-23 08:30 · Score: 2
  
  It's more that for you to make an insurance claim you must have a police report. Your most likely not getting the car back unless it was just some joyriders.
  
  --
  Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
8. Re:Of course they aren't by ElizabethGreene · 2017-06-23 08:39 · Score: 1
  
  My employer contacted the FBI for a security incident in 2009-ish. We were told that they don't consider matters with damages less than $10,000. Is that still the case?
9. Re:Of course they aren't by omnichad · 2017-06-23 08:51 · Score: 1
  
  99% of the time, it's outside their jurisdiction anyway. How many domestic ransomware attacks have there been compared to China/Russia/Ukraine?
10. Re:Of course they aren't by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 09:09 · Score: 0
  
  Again, there's nothing in it for the victim.
  Actually there is, but whether or not it's worth it is another story. There are several tiers of damages before LEO will touch the case. First is the law limit, $10000 IIRC. Then the field office manager won't assign resources unless the damages are above a certain [higher] number. Then the DOJ won't prosecute unless the damages are higher still. There are exceptions of course, mostly political in nature.
  Now what they will do is add up the damages. Let's say the DOJ number is $75K. Mr. Evil Hacker does only $1K of damages to you, and only you report it. They probably won't touch him even if they know who he is, unless you are politically connected. But let's say he didn't just hit you, but 99 other people, doing $1K damage each. If 74 more report it, then he has done $75K in total as far as LE is concerned. Now they might come after him and prosecute. Depending on the country he's in, that could be far easier said than done, but possible.
  This doesn't make the victims whole, but it's better than Mr. Evil Hacker getting away with it.
11. Re:Of course they aren't by phantomfive · 2017-06-23 09:58 · Score: 1
  
  Worth remembering when the FBI announces that North Korea (or anyone else) hacked someone.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
12. Re:Of course they aren't by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 10:34 · Score: 0
  
  It's more that for you to make an insurance claim you must have a police report.
  Even having a police report to file an insurance claim is hardly worth it.
  Sure it should be easy enough to show all your audit evidence that you follow various industry standards and less useful things like passing SOX, but then you need to justify the time spent fixing the problem as extreme.
  If we were to get hit with ransomware, I'd simply wipe the machine(s), reimage from backup, and pickup the day where we left off.
  The, at most, hour spent waiting for a progress bar during the reimage is coincidentally the same amount of time (thus money) we would spend as part of standard operating procedure when a computers hard drive dies too, so it's pretty hard to justify any expense to insurance.
  The infection would need to be pretty damn bad and spread pretty deep before it costs enough time to bother with that. This is why security in multiple layers and well planned out access controls is so trumpeted.
  In fact, if I was to hold on to an infected workstation, or at least its hard drive, it would then cost us actual money to replace the workstation or pop in a spare HD to reimage to.
  And for what?
  A sample of the malware which the FBI already has? A bitcoin address which they also already have? Communication channels with the attackers which they should already have too?
  I have nothing to offer the authorities that they don't already have.
  You may very well argue that not everyone runs a decently maintained network with proper and complete backups in multiple stages to recover so easily.
  But I think the fact that so few people report such infections to the authorities hints pretty heavily towards believing most companies actually do.
  The small number of reported incidence they are complaining about? That reflects a small number of companies not equipped well to handle such an infection. Or a natural disaster, or well known events such as hard drives failing, which of course is never an IF but a WHEN.
13. Re:Of course they aren't by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 11:18 · Score: 0
  
  While they don't do anything right away, they stockpile this information and detect patterns.
14. Re: Of course they aren't by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 11:44 · Score: 0
  
  Just remember, those were the idiots who took the San Bernardino iPhone and tried to bruteforce it without making a backup beforehand, and then whined and cried that they absolutely, positively, 109% *had* to have access to Apples backdoor for the phone.
  Then they paid a million dollars to a company to unlock it for them, which really showed just how trivial the process really was all along.
15. Re:Of course they aren't by skids · 2017-06-23 13:04 · Score: 1
  
  Seriously if you reported every con phone call, phishing attempt, ebay check cashing scam, malware site, or fraudulent snail mail how much of a time suck would that be? We're drowning in criminal activity these days... no surprise people just blow it off. (And now the role-model-in-chief is a fraudster so it's just going to get worse.)
  I only report the ones that piss me off when I'm in a bad mood. (Actually I have a good coincidental record of seeing the government take the rare action right after I file one of my rare reports.)
  That being said, if the law enforcement and consumer protection agencies actually want more reports, they would be best advised to do some SEO so you can easily google which sites to report specific types of fraud. Though frankly, I'd not be surprised if in a few years consumer protection NPOs are sending out warnings not to give certain federal agencies any PII because they are so corrupt they are running cons with it.
  
  --
  Someone had to do it.
16. Re:Of course they aren't by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 13:13 · Score: 1
  
  Field agents for most places are like that. The actual technical people aren't called in unless absolutely necessary. A non-profit group I'm involved with was a victim of cybercrime where they managed to spearphish an officer to wire money to someone 1000 miles away. The recipient then used the information from the wire transfer to social engineer the bank and empty the account. Half a million gone in less than a day. It literally took them months to get the necessary warrants on the recipients account to seize the funds and get financial information and then three months after that before I was contacted by the FBI's forensic accountant to get some information. Took forever to get the money (well, most of it) back and we had a hard time paying bills in the meantime. But back to my original point, it makes sense to me because why waste expertise until necessary. Most investigations like that are just paper pushing anyway.
17. Re:Of course they aren't by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 19:28 · Score: 0
  
  My employer contacted the FBI for a security incident in 2009-ish. We were told that they don't consider matters with damages less than $10,000. Is that still the case?
  I had the same conversation with the FBI. Since then I have reported Zero incidents since there is no way to prove that loss in the average hack attack. Which is why, I suppose, you only hear about things on the grand scale of Sony, Yahoo, etc. etc....
18. Re: Of course they aren't by zippthorne · 2017-06-24 04:20 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, they might've paid a lost less than a million dollars for it.
  From April, 2016:
  
  At a conference on global security in London, a moderator asked James B. Comey Jr., the F.B.I. chief, how much bureau officials had to pay the undisclosed outside group to demonstrate how to bypass the phone’s encryption.
  “A lot,” Mr. Comey said, as audience members at the Aspen Institute event laughed.
  He continued: “Let’s see, more than I will make in the remainder of this job, which is seven years and four months, for sure.” ...
  The F.B.I. director makes about $185,100 a year — so Mr. Comey stands to earn at least $1.35 million at that base rate of pay for the remainder of his 10-year term.
  F.B.I. Director Suggests Bill for iPhone Hacking Topped $1.3 Million
  So, the new lower bound for the cost of the hack now that we've actually measured how much time Comey really had left is about $170,000.
  
  --
  Can you be Even More Awesome?!
Why would anyone report to the FBI? by pj2541 · 2017-06-23 07:28 · Score: 1

It's not like they are particularly trusted or trustworthy. And I've never even heard of the "Internet Crime Complaint Center" and that likely goes for most people. The average person would only contact the FBI if they expected that the FBI would have some chance of doing something about the bad guys, and I just don't see that happening.
1. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by __aaclcg7560 · 2017-06-23 07:38 · Score: 1
  
  I filed a complaint a few days ago because some asshat tried to be cute with a dick pic of two men who bear a remarkable resembelance to me having sex. The dick pic by itself was nothing. Putting my name and URL was something else.
  https://www.ic3.gov/
2. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 07:53 · Score: 0
  
  So have you been indicted for sodomy rape yet?
3. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 08:04 · Score: 0
  
  Seriously. Even if I wanted to report a ransomware attack to the FBI, I wouldn't know how to do so. But even then, I wouldn't, because the most I could expect them to do is disrupt my life "investigating" and then never solving the crime. I don't particularly need or want FBI agents crawling over every computer I own, especially when there's basically zero chance of them solving anything.
4. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 08:09 · Score: 0
  
  I filed a complaint a few days ago because some asshat tried to be cute with a dick pic of two men who bear a remarkable resembelance to me having sex. The dick pic by itself was nothing. Putting my name and URL was something else.
  https://www.ic3.gov/
  Your iCloud account got hacked too???
5. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by Trax3001BBS · 2017-06-23 08:54 · Score: 1
  
  It's not like they are particularly trusted or trustworthy. And I've never even heard of the "Internet Crime Complaint Center" and that likely goes for most people. The average person would only contact the FBI if they expected that the FBI would have some chance of doing something about the bad guys, and I just don't see that happening.
  Yep. I ran into a bit of scamware that would of used flash against me if not for many things (NX not enabled, Not being a 64bit system, and on).
  Searching the number to of been called one finds many who complied with the scam top the list while scammers themselves follow. Google 1-844-667-1499 some reported it some didn't from their post and even then it was to the FTC or FCC.
6. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by omnichad · 2017-06-23 08:55 · Score: 1
  
  Unless you paid money for a copy of the pics, you reported it to the wrong place. At best this is a civil issue, not criminal.
7. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by Trax3001BBS · 2017-06-23 09:02 · Score: 1
  
  And no I myself didn't report it, submitted it to /. who didn't deem it worthy... Trax3001bbs hands in pocket, looks at ground and slowly kicks at the dirt.
8. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by __aaclcg7560 · 2017-06-23 09:22 · Score: 1
  
  Unless you paid money for a copy of the pics, you reported it to the wrong place. At best this is a civil issue, not criminal.
  This isn't just about the dick pic. It's three months of harassment on Slashdot that resulted in five user accounts being deleted and over two dozen DMCA takedown notices to remove my photo from image websites around the world.
9. Re: Why would anyone report to the FBI? by KGIII · 2017-06-23 09:28 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe they have editorial standards? Of !== have, which you did twice in your parent post.
  Wait, no... They don't have standards. It is obviously personal, and they don't like you.
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
10. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by omnichad · 2017-06-23 09:32 · Score: 1
  
  None of that is their jurisdiction either.
11. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by __aaclcg7560 · 2017-06-23 09:44 · Score: 1
  
  None of that is their jurisdiction either.
  Harassment across state lines, Russian websites, foreign nationals. The only thing lacking is someone named Trump.
12. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 09:47 · Score: 0
  
  Putting my name and URL was something else.
  Yes, it was "something else." The real question is, what "something else" was it? It was certainly not a breach of the law.
13. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by __aaclcg7560 · 2017-06-23 10:02 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, it was "something else." The real question is, what "something else" was it? It was certainly not a breach of the law.
  Might be repeated violations of TOS at different websites under the computer fraud act.
14. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by JohnFen · 2017-06-23 11:26 · Score: 1
  
  Numerous courts have ruled that to breach a website's terms of service is not a criminal act. It is a contract violation, therefore a civil matter.
15. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 12:45 · Score: 0
  
  It's cute that you think Slashdot matters in the real world.
16. Re: Why would anyone report to the FBI? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 12:54 · Score: 0
  
  I seriously wish you would leave this place. You have been nothing but trouble since you started posting regularly on slashdot. Please go back to 4chan or someplace other than slashdot. We do not care about your escapades. You are becoming worst than APK. You have seriously diluted the quality of convos and high jacked threads to talk about yourself.
  TLDR: just leave slashdot, it's obvious to everyone but you.
17. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 13:29 · Score: 0
  
  Okay, counselor. These are the provisions of the CFAA. Please do point out how "posting a photo of two nude guys" constitutes a violation of any of the following provisions. Which sections, specifically, do you feel were violated?
  
  (a) Whoever—
  (1) having knowingly accessed a computer without authorization or exceeding authorized access, and by means of such conduct having obtained information that has been determined by the United States Government pursuant to an Executive order or statute to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national defense or foreign relations, or any restricted data, as defined in paragraph y. of section 11 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, with reason to believe that such information so obtained could be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation willfully communicates, delivers, transmits, or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it;
  (2) intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains—
  (A) information contained in a financial record of a financial institution, or of a card issuer as defined in section 1602 (n) [1] of title 15, or contained in a file of a consumer reporting agency on a consumer, as such terms are defined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.);
  (B) information from any department or agency of the United States; or
  (C) information from any protected computer;
  (3) intentionally, without authorization to access any nonpublic computer of a department or agency of the United States, accesses such a computer of that department or agency that is exclusively for the use of the Government of the United States or, in the case of a computer not exclusively for such use, is used by or for the Government of the United States and such conduct affects that use by or for the Government of the United States;
  (4) knowingly and with intent to defraud, accesses a protected computer without authorization, or exceeds authorized access, and by means of such conduct furthers the intended fraud and obtains anything of value, unless the object of the fraud and the thing obtained consists only of the use of the computer and the value of such use is not more than $5,000 in any 1-year period;
  (5)
  (A) knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer;
  (B) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, recklessly causes damage; or
  (C) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, causes damage and loss.
  (6) knowingly and with intent to defraud traffics (as defined in section 1029) in any password or similar information through which a computer may be accessed without authorization, if—
  (A) such trafficking affects interstate or foreign commerce; or
  (B) such computer is used by or for the Government of the United States;
  (7) with intent to extort from any person any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any—
  (A) threat to cause damage to a protected computer;
  (B) threat to obtain information from a protected computer without authorization or in excess of authorization or to impair the confidentiality of information obtained from a protected computer without authorization or by exceeding authorized access; or
  (C) demand or request for money or other thing of value in relation to damage to a protected computer, where such damage was caused to facilitate the extortion
18. Re: Why would anyone report to the FBI? by Trax3001BBS · 2017-06-23 14:37 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe they have editorial standards? Of !== have, which you did twice in your parent post.
  Don't get me wrong it was a badly written piece and not complete, better off being posted to my journal.
19. Re: Why would anyone report to the FBI? by KGIII · 2017-06-23 15:52 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, I was just giving you shit for "of." Would have... Could have... etc...
  
  --
  "So long and thanks for all the fish."
20. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-24 00:29 · Score: 0
  
  Oh our dear fatass spammer. Do you know how to use a search engine? There are literally hundreds of photos of you out there, and it seems you've become a meme. success is definitely yours - an uneducated stupid fat fuck seems to be hand-fighting a script instead of the dick he can't see unless he's wearing a corset. let me translate the foreign language ones for you, since I doubt you know any. "my corset pushed my testicles under my shirt", "football player", "a football player? - a football"
  Have you noticed you're a big fat meme now too? Here are mostly the russian domains so you can call the FBI again. You can have fun finding the english ones yourself asshat. Get off this fuckins site loser.
  http://i12.pixs.ru/storage/8/2...
  http://imgdisk.ru/image/rG7r
  https://makeameme.org/meme/350...
  https://imgflip.com/i/1rfsbk
  http://risovach.ru/upload/2017...
  http://imglink.ru/show-image.p...
  http://imagestun.com/hosting/?...
  https://saveshot.net/i/PuU5n
  http://www.picshare.ru/view/81...
  http://ipic.su/img/img7/fs/s1....
21. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-24 01:36 · Score: 0
  
  No worries buddy. There are ones not gay, and without your domain. Just your picture. http://www.memecr.ru/meme/down...
  I do see in this photo someone wiped the cum from your shirt below the red warning sign. Was that the guy tickling your asshole in the pic you put up on slashdot yesterday to draw traffic to your site?
  What an accomplishment. You're an international joke now. We got English, Spanish, French, Russian - I'm waiting on a korean super-gay one, with animals.
22. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-24 01:54 · Score: 0
  
  I gotcha playa. Hangul part says "think ball player"
  https://hostingkartinok.com/sh...
23. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-24 14:04 · Score: 0
  
  I'm sorry - you're sending DMCA notices to websites around the world? Do you not know what the DMCA is?
  also - I hope "over two dozen" means "many hundreds." There are hundreds of pics with many variations on gay themes and your Warning photo, across 5 country domains, across over 100 websites. And that's from my non-google search of several search engines.
  I'm going to also guess this will keep going. You seem to have only taken down the few links posted in slashdot comments, not the bulk of the content. Also, most of the slashdot links are still working, so I'm guessing places like France and Russia don't know what a DMCA notice is - much like you.
24. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-25 00:38 · Score: 0
  
  Actually, this isn't about the dick pick. Usually when you issue a takedown notice, a person who skims the notice looks at what's being taken down. You're just being made very popular to actual people all over the world. I'm guessing that's why the many domains in different languages. They (like me) likely find it hilarious and forward it to all their friends, who forward it to all their friends, who post it on facebook, etc. I think you get the idea. Oh who am I kidding - much like with anything beyond helpdesk-level pc expertise you have not idea. You've been perfectly playing the game they wanted you to play. Welcome to being a worldwide meme moron. Good job.
25. Re:Why would anyone report to the FBI? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-25 00:53 · Score: 0
  
  Forgot to add. I stumbled across this french one (and promptly uploaded to imgur of course). A funny commentary on how your broken brain keeps declaring victory despite you losing in the worst way imaginable. Given what you are, I'm guessing it's the same with your whole life. Instead of winning you redefine losing as winning, hence staying forever a disgusting unsuccessful loser.
  ["Chris Reimer beats a Perl script"] with a picture of a fat fuck jacking off, and of course your domain buddy. You're welcome for the ad revenue - enjoy your free cup of coffee and don't forget to add some cream.
  https://ibb.co/dbTzCk
  http://imgur.com/a/gxkvc
Is there a reason to bother? by Presence+Eternal · 2017-06-23 07:31 · Score: 1

It's kind of futile to report them, isn't it? The US doesn't have any meaningful ability to deal with attackers in Nigeria, much less China or Russia. Or am I wrong? I'd be happy to tell my customers they have some recourse.
Why would you? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 07:35 · Score: 0

The only things you should do when attacked by ransomware are restore from backups and identify the root cause of infection.
1. Re:Why would you? by GameboyRMH · 2017-06-23 09:08 · Score: 1
  
  This. Ransomware executed on a desktop at my office while I was on vacation last year. It encrypted many files on the local HDD and a large fraction of the file shares. The source was soon found, cleaned up, and the affected files were restored from backups. What's worth reporting?
  
  --
  "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Because it's theirs. by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 07:39 · Score: 0

People aren't reporting ransomware attacks because they'll be arrested for resisting the NSA.
Why bother? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 07:45 · Score: 1

Most companies don't report ransomware attacks to the FBI because most companies consider it a waste of time. Everyone knows that if you get hit by ransomware, there's only three possible outcomes:
1. You consider the encrypted data lost, and move on without it, or roll back to your freshest, unencrypted backup.
2. You pay the ransom and hope to get the data back.
3. You get lucky and the ransomware that hit you is one that's already been broken and you're able to recover the data yourself.
There's nothing the FBI can do to alter those three options. The feds aren't going to track down the originator of the ransomware and force him to give you the decryption key. And even if they could, it would be pointless because very few companies could afford to spend the weeks, months, or even years it would take for the FBI to complete such an operation. I'd be willing to bet that for most companies that get hit by ransomware, the biggest headache is the halt to production that occurs while the data is being recreated or recovered, either from backups or by paying off the ransom. Adding the FBI to the mix does nothing but add more paperwork and more meetings to the this process.
What should I report? by TechyImmigrant · 2017-06-23 07:47 · Score: 3, Insightful

I get on the order of 50,000 attack probes every day. Should I be cataloging and report each one to the FBI?
What makes a ransomware attack a special snowflake attack that needs reporting compared to spyware or bot install attempts?

--
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
1. Re:What should I report? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 08:05 · Score: 0
  
  Possibly the extortive nature of it? I wouldn't think to report a bot or something like your alternatives, but if I had my files locked with ransomware you can bet I'd at least consider contacting some authorities.
2. Re:What should I report? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 09:19 · Score: 0
  
  I get on the order of 50,000 attack probes every day. Should I be cataloging and report each one to the FBI?
  What makes a ransomware attack a special snowflake attack that needs reporting compared to spyware or bot install attempts?
  Actually, yes: there should absolutely be a public API that people can use to report automated attack probes to the FBI.
3. Re:What should I report? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 09:38 · Score: 0
  
  You're assuming the files are worth something. But if your files were worth something, why wouldn't you have a backup?
4. Re:What should I report? by phantomfive · 2017-06-23 10:14 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, yes: there should absolutely be a public API that people can use to report automated attack probes to the FBI.
  That sounds so open to abuse that malware writers everywhere are just salivating thinking about it.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Waste of time by Nicolas+Cage · 2017-06-23 07:55 · Score: 0

Why report something for the sake of reporting it? They aren't gonna help you...
Goddamit ... by CaptainDork · 2017-06-23 08:02 · Score: 1

... when we say, "Don't go to the police," we mean it.

Soon after, another email from the Dark Overlord arrived at Larson. “They said they felt they owed us an explanation as to why they had done it,” said Jill Larson. In the email, the hackers argued that Larson Studios had broken the terms of the agreement by talking to the FBI. “So they decided to punish us.”

--
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
No shit... by WolfgangVL · 2017-06-23 08:05 · Score: 1

Last I checked, FBI said to just pay the ransom.
Why bother even reporting it.
When dealing with ransomware myself, I do check the FBI for decryption-keys before I start restoring from backups, but reporting?
Soon as I'm on the payroll, Hoover.

--
You are being ripped off every second of every day, so that advertisers can help rip you off even more tomorrow.
$ransom bad publicity ? by moeinvt · 2017-06-23 09:02 · Score: 3, Interesting

If you file a report, is the FBI under any obligation to keep it confidential? I wouldn't trust them to stay quiet even if that was their official policy. Those guys who leaked the "Orange is the New Black" episodes somehow learned that the studio had called the FBI, after being warned not to, and punished them for doing it, even though they paid the ransom.
I read one paper by a security expert and he said that big banks in Europe and N. America have been doing this for years. Eat the losses from computer crime as a cost of doing business rather than risk damage to their reputation by reporting that someone had broken into their customer's accounts.
I'm sure a lot of other companies would rather pay up than endure the bad publicity which would come from word getting out that "Company X was hacked".
Creimer assults with deadly weapons by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 09:48 · Score: 0

And a /. user threatened to shoot me if I didn't shut up. They also threatened me with legal action, by sueing me in court, if I didn't shut up. Lastly they threatened to report me to the FBI. All because I said things their liberal mind didn't agree with.
The only piece of shit on /. is creimer. I'm not sure why 5 other accounts were banned when it was YOU making death threats to other users. Is satirical posting worse than assault with a deadly weapon? No. Perhaps you should request that YOUR account be banned instead. That would also solve your issues of "harassment" that you think you are receiving.
1. Re:Creimer assults with deadly weapons by __aaclcg7560 · 2017-06-23 09:58 · Score: 1
  
  And a /. user threatened to shoot me if I didn't shut up. They also threatened me with legal action, by sueing me in court, if I didn't shut up. Lastly they threatened to report me to the FBI. All because I said things their liberal mind didn't agree with.
  Thanks to you I had to create a Python script to scrape my Slashdot comment history, making it very easy to reconstruct the events of the last three months.
  
  I'm not sure why 5 other accounts were banned when it was YOU making death threats to other users.
  File a complaint. I did and got results.
2. Re:Creimer assults with deadly weapons by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-24 00:54 · Score: 0
  
  the only results you seemed to get is a shit-tone of your ugly mug on the interwebs. well, and pictures of fat men fucking on what appear to be ads for your gay site. I personally like this one: http://www.pixic.ru/i/g0k144P0...
  time to call the fbi again. wait - aren't you already on a 5-year internship contract with them locking down microsoft paint and cleaning closets?
  by the way, for your ease of mind, I hit about 10 results of random gay pics with cdreimer.com on them. they're on yandex search, but you gotta search in russian to find them. enjoy you demented life loser, and thank to slashdotter who did it. you're fucking hilarious. one of them translates to "meanwhile in america" and has your face on a fat bitch being reamed by a horse. it's beautiful. and it has your site on it.
3. Re:Creimer assults with deadly weapons by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-24 11:32 · Score: 0
  
  thanks to you i created a perl script to scrape yandex search results and populate hundreds of imaging sites. needs some heavy raid refactoring though.
  File a complaint. Keep filing complaints. As far as results, yeah, you're sure getting great results - more and more pictures of you with funny messages on them. The gay shit wasn't my script though. But now it is. After some refactoring the script now spreads all the images that are linked in slashdot posts in response to your comments. Enjoy - I know we do.
  http://imgdisk.ru/image/rGFE
  http://risovach.ru/kartinka/11...
4. Re:Creimer assults with deadly weapons by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-24 13:51 · Score: 0
  
  Let's see... You sent a note to slashdot and they took down an account. Others popped up. You took that down. Others popped up. Then they got bored with spending time typing up content and switched to the much more automated posting of gay pictures of you on hundreds of sites with a script, which you seem to be manually fighting.
  Yeah, you gefinitely got results. Any normal person would look at this as the worst possible outcome for you. You actually think you're preventing someone from creating new accounts on slashdot, and are effective at taking down pictures on the internet. What. A. Moron.
  Creimer vs Perl - Who will get more results?
  caption: deformed
Why would I convict myself? by medv4380 · 2017-06-23 09:49 · Score: 2

Ransom laws get sticky so why should I report when paying them may or may not be illegal. If I report and it happens that paying the ransom is illegal then the ransom can't be paid and the FBI is slowing down recovery. If I pay the ransom to fix the problem but then report it I might get in trouble so why bother? On the other hand, If I just restore the backups I've also destroyed the evidence so Why would I report the problem?
1. Re:Why would I convict myself? by Tony+Isaac · 2017-06-25 16:28 · Score: 1
  
  That's about like the oil companies arguing that they had to pay bribes to Nigerian officials because that was the only way to get things done. Now, the authorities are catching up with them, and the companies are paying a big price. Refusing to report ransomware to authorities because of fear of getting busted for paying ransoms...is short-sighted.
2. Re:Why would I convict myself? by medv4380 · 2017-06-26 08:49 · Score: 1
  
  Perhaps, but I just restore from the tape backup, and nuke and pave the infected machines that aren't. Lost work? Let this be a lesson why you don't save to your desktop. No need to contact the FBI, and no money trail to lead back to me. Still is destruction of evidence and failure to report a crime. Who cares.
Well, duh by JohnFen · 2017-06-23 11:20 · Score: 1

What would be the point?
Give us your metedata by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-23 15:35 · Score: 0

We need it to solve crime, or at least spend money failing to solve crime. So we can get more money next time. To fail to solve crime.
I'd like to see the FBI and CIA budgeted according to results.
Testing by Anonymous Coward · 2017-06-27 04:52 · Score: 0

This is a test
Q123456789012345
Q098765432109876
Q012345678901234