Hacked hospital chain says all 250 US facilities affected
bleepingcomputer.com
bleepingcomputer.com
There are many ways the endpoints can be owned but not the data. One option common in healthcare is that the computers are dumb terminals for sessions on a remote server. Another is that to access the data you have to authenticate with a physical smart card.
As long as it's confirmed that the ransomware only attacked the endpoints and no active data exfil was attempted (or hasn't succeeded), the statement may be completely true.
also the linked article doesn't say anything about 250 facilities
think they intended to link this article: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/hacked-hospital-chai...
Or maybe it's a moderately-skilled person in an underdeveloped country, who, despite being moderately skilled, has no legitimate opportunities. Maybe the person responsible even has mixed feelings about it. Who knows?
That poor US hospital, I'm sure it is a bastion of fairness and equality for all. I'm sure this wasn't facilitated by their own greed and negligence.
Save your pearl clutching for nextdoor. Here we like to understand the factors that lead to a particular outcome, rather than moralizing hysteria.
When hospitals can’t access their information, people die. Some crimes are victimless; this isn’t. Actual innocent people are going to be harmed. Good grief. Get your priorities straight and stop trying to start flame wars.
edit: apologies for the jokey answer but it's a serious point. I don't think it's an ironic name for a private company at all. If I'm selling healthcare services of course I want 100% of people buying them from me, ideally with the only competition being my subsidiaries.
>[...] for a private healthcare enterprise.