Would you rather: 1) Have your vulnerable systems taken offline w/o warning by whitehat (with note on how to patch) 2) Get crypto-ransom
-
-
I get your point just don't think there's a one size fits all answer
-
True, but you can't simply say "I don't want to play this game" as option 2 is happening whether you want it or not.
-
hah, true. So classic trolley problem - do you cause acceptable amount of damage to prevent more
-
Exactly. I am wondering if the damage that is being done as we speak is sufficient to warrant experimenting with such options.
-
i.e. would option 1 cause less damage to the target than option 2.
-
option 1: large damage in small amount of cases, option 2: unknown damage in unknown but growing cases
-
hard equation to tackle
-
The reports I'm seeing in main stream media on option 2 are of large damage in many cases, both rising fast.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
files being locked up on an eg life support system might not be worst case scenario, but rebooting that system might be.
-
in that case crims will soon start rebooting it until you pay them.
-
valid point, but that's not the current model.
-
So you believe we don't have to plan ahead and prevent future threads?
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.