Hacker News Reader

Comment by hnthrowaway0315 | Hacker News Reader

Basically every large, traditional business is relying on some offshore gig for certain key technical responsibilities. They probably don't consider it the real key as they are cost centers, but hey ransomewares are reminding them.

It's not even just offshore. Some onshore consultancies are really of agasp quality.

View on HN

Is there any case of a company suffering significant financial backlash due ransomware attacks?

My current impression is: consumers don't care, regulators don't care... so why should CEOs care?

Yeah you have a good point.

Customers care if your business is in security, especially b2b. Though the biggest downstream effects are probably from security tightening making it more difficult to get anything done.

Source: my company was hit a couple months ago

I don't think in the case of airlines we have the option to care. We are just kind of stuck with whatever the government-backed airline oligarchy chooses to do. The airlines would be the ones to have to care for it to matter. When the 737-MAX crashes occurred many frequent travelers, including myself, flat out refused to fly 737-MAX even after we were given assurances by the regulatory bodies. But after a while it just didn't matter. Life goes on, your company will book you on the plane that's the cheapest or part of their plan or whatnot, and you just get stuck being a cog in the wheel again.

The MGM ransomware supposedly cost them $100mil

Is it a tax write off ?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com