ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Ransomware hits admin workstation and kills 7 servers

    IT Discussion
    ransomware cryptolocker cryptowall v2.0
    5
    21
    4.2k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • thanksajdotcomT
      thanksajdotcom @stus
      last edited by

      @stus I work at McAfee. That's why I find it hysterical!

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • thanksajdotcomT
        thanksajdotcom
        last edited by

        But not supporting their AV.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • stusS
          stus Vendor
          last edited by

          Yes, there is some irony here. LOL

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • scottalanmillerS
            scottalanmiller
            last edited by

            Welcome to the Mango Lassi community!

            stusS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • StrongBadS
              StrongBad @thanksajdotcom
              last edited by

              @ajstringham said:

              Cool story. Still, who was stupid enough to get hit with Cryptolocker? Did their AV not pick this up? Did someone ignore the AV warning if it came up?

              Tons of people get hit by Cryptolocker. You have to assume that people will do stupid things in order to think well about security.

              thanksajdotcomT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • thanksajdotcomT
                thanksajdotcom @StrongBad
                last edited by

                @StrongBad said:

                @ajstringham said:

                Cool story. Still, who was stupid enough to get hit with Cryptolocker? Did their AV not pick this up? Did someone ignore the AV warning if it came up?

                Tons of people get hit by Cryptolocker. You have to assume that people will do stupid things in order to think well about security.

                I know but still, that's a straight-up AV fail.

                StrongBadS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • stusS
                  stus Vendor @scottalanmiller
                  last edited by

                  @scottalanmiller thanks Scott !!!

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • StrongBadS
                    StrongBad @thanksajdotcom
                    last edited by

                    @ajstringham said:

                    @StrongBad said:

                    @ajstringham said:

                    Cool story. Still, who was stupid enough to get hit with Cryptolocker? Did their AV not pick this up? Did someone ignore the AV warning if it came up?

                    Tons of people get hit by Cryptolocker. You have to assume that people will do stupid things in order to think well about security.

                    I know but still, that's a straight-up AV fail.

                    AV only protects you if you let it.

                    thanksajdotcomT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • thanksajdotcomT
                      thanksajdotcom @StrongBad
                      last edited by

                      @StrongBad said:

                      @ajstringham said:

                      @StrongBad said:

                      @ajstringham said:

                      Cool story. Still, who was stupid enough to get hit with Cryptolocker? Did their AV not pick this up? Did someone ignore the AV warning if it came up?

                      Tons of people get hit by Cryptolocker. You have to assume that people will do stupid things in order to think well about security.

                      I know but still, that's a straight-up AV fail.

                      AV only protects you if you let it.

                      Yes, but AV is, as a rule, designed to prevent stupidity. IT guys could go without AV on their computers and would still almost never get viruses. Maybe some spyware, etc but almost never a full-blown virus. We know better. End-users are where AV is most important from a protection standpoint. Obviously IT guys have the admin rights but from a preventing it for prevention's sake standpoint, AV is most important for end-users. Obviously McAfee wasn't doing its job...

                      DashrenderD StrongBadS 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • DashrenderD
                        Dashrender @thanksajdotcom
                        last edited by

                        @ajstringham said:

                        @StrongBad said:

                        @ajstringham said:

                        @StrongBad said:

                        @ajstringham said:

                        Cool story. Still, who was stupid enough to get hit with Cryptolocker? Did their AV not pick this up? Did someone ignore the AV warning if it came up?

                        Tons of people get hit by Cryptolocker. You have to assume that people will do stupid things in order to think well about security.

                        I know but still, that's a straight-up AV fail.

                        AV only protects you if you let it.

                        Yes, but AV is, as a rule, designed to prevent stupidity. IT guys could go without AV on their computers and would still almost never get viruses. Maybe some spyware, etc but almost never a full-blown virus. We know better. End-users are where AV is most important from a protection standpoint. Obviously IT guys have the admin rights but from a preventing it for prevention's sake standpoint, AV is most important for end-users. Obviously McAfee wasn't doing its job...

                        Sadly Steve Gibson, a renown security specialist, has reportedly done this - run with NO AV, and gotten no viruii.

                        I just don't consider that wise unless you're air gapped.

                        scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • thanksajdotcomT
                          thanksajdotcom
                          last edited by

                          @Dashrender , I'm not saying it's a good idea. We need it because legitimate sites still get hacked and create vulnerabilities for us where there aren't normally ones. Still, most IT guys would be fine 98% of the time without any AV on their systems.

                          DashrenderD scottalanmillerS 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • DashrenderD
                            Dashrender @thanksajdotcom
                            last edited by

                            @ajstringham said:

                            @Dashrender , I'm not saying it's a good idea. We need it because legitimate sites still get hacked and create vulnerabilities for us where there aren't normally ones. Still, most IT guys would be fine 98% of the time without any AV on their systems.

                            LOL - considering another discussion - Programmers would not be covered by this 98%.. lol

                            thanksajdotcomT 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                            • thanksajdotcomT
                              thanksajdotcom @Dashrender
                              last edited by

                              @Dashrender said:

                              @ajstringham said:

                              @Dashrender , I'm not saying it's a good idea. We need it because legitimate sites still get hacked and create vulnerabilities for us where there aren't normally ones. Still, most IT guys would be fine 98% of the time without any AV on their systems.

                              LOL - considering another discussion - Programmers would not be covered by this 98%.. lol

                              Lol I suppose that would be true

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • StrongBadS
                                StrongBad @thanksajdotcom
                                last edited by

                                @ajstringham said:

                                Yes, but AV is, as a rule, designed to prevent stupidity.
                                Not at all, let alone as a rule. That is not what AV is. I think you are confusing it with best practices.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • scottalanmillerS
                                  scottalanmiller @Dashrender
                                  last edited by

                                  @Dashrender said:

                                  Sadly Steve Gibson, a renown security specialist, has reportedly done this - run with NO AV, and gotten no viruii.

                                  I just don't consider that wise unless you're air gapped.

                                  Sure, you can. You can also not use passwords or always run as the admin. There are all kinds of things that you might get away with. Security is about layers. You can run servers without backups too and you might never lose a thing. But we all know that it is risky. But if you roll the dice, sometimes you make a critical hit no matter how unlikely it is.

                                  And Steve Gibson only doesn't think he has a virus. He doesn't actually know.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • scottalanmillerS
                                    scottalanmiller @thanksajdotcom
                                    last edited by

                                    @ajstringham said:

                                    @Dashrender , I'm not saying it's a good idea. We need it because legitimate sites still get hacked and create vulnerabilities for us where there aren't normally ones. Still, most IT guys would be fine 98% of the time without any AV on their systems.

                                    I've not met these IT guys. I don't think that that is a realistic statement at all. I'd say saying 2% would be fine would be a stretch. Most IT people I see run as admin and are pretty reckless with security.

                                    DashrenderD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • DashrenderD
                                      Dashrender @scottalanmiller
                                      last edited by

                                      @scottalanmiller said:

                                      I've not met these IT guys. I don't think that that is a realistic statement at all. I'd say saying 2% would be fine would be a stretch. Most IT people I see run as admin and are pretty reckless with security.

                                      Yeah, because of places like this, when i did my last PC upgrade (to windows 😎 I moved to a two user account setup. 1 non admin for normal working - like this posting, 2 admin for admin stuff.

                                      A bit of a pain, but MS really does have it down pretty well now prompting me when it needs elevated permissions.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • 1
                                      • 2
                                      • 1 / 2
                                      • First post
                                        Last post