Microsoft Says Some SharePoint Server Hackers Now Using Ransomware (reuters.com) 26
A cyber-espionage campaign exploiting vulnerable Microsoft server software has escalated to deploying ransomware against victims, Microsoft said, marking a significant shift from typical state-backed data theft operations to attacks designed to paralyze networks until payment is made. The campaign by a group Microsoft calls "Storm-2603" has compromised at least 400 organizations, according to Netherlands-based cybersecurity firm Eye Security, quadrupling from 100 victims cataloged over the weekend. The National Institutes of Health confirmed one server was breached and additional servers were isolated as a precaution, while reports indicate the Department of Homeland Security and multiple other federal agencies were also compromised.
No problem - Thomas Fugate is on the case (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Complete with his Dreamworks face. [independent.co.uk]
Re: (Score:3)
Labelling this as ageist sounds like blatant woke-ism to me.
It's hardly ageist to understand that the years of experience necessary to do such a job well is critical.
Re: (Score:3)
Another reason [thehill.com] that drunk at the Defense Department needs to go.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you asserting that's what they did? Because they certainly had the opportunity. Or are you just being bigoted?
Re: (Score:2)
Ironic the anti-DEI prez is doing the very thing DEI is meant to reduce: putting loyalty and connections above merit.
Back to basics. (Score:5, Informative)
It seems to me that it's time to go back to the basics of having local servers and site separation to avoid situations where the whole company is impacted by a single central service going down.
Re: (Score:1)
That doesn't do a lot of good for distributed workforces. The alternatives, such as VPNs, come with their own issues. I think Sharepoint is a horrible beast that's the worst of all worlds, but the concept itself isn't bad.
Re: (Score:2)
Local servers can have public IPs. If one has already accepted giving up IP access control to use a cloud service, you can just as easily open up a Public IP to your local services and use the same level of authentication/authorization, complete with MFA, while still retaining full ownership and control of the full stack.
Re: (Score:1)
There's not a hope in hell that I would ever expose a SMB file server to the Internet.
Re: (Score:2)
Who said anything about an SMB file server?
Maybe you mean whatever Sharepoint is using (basically WebDAV)? If you wouldn't expose a WebDAV server to the internet, why would you use Sharepoint and thus expose a WebDAV server to the internet?
I don't know if we even disagree here. Sharepoint conceptually has some good selling points. Hosting file services internally does come with its own issues and headaches. There's a lot of area between those. I was only noting that, if looking at it as an either/or decisio
Hold on, Tex (Score:5, Insightful)
As bad as the cloud is, too many companies manage IT in a dysfunctional way if it's not their core business because they apply the management style of their own domain to IT, which is often a poor fit. The cloud is the least evil for such co's. Cloud is a C-plus to their D.
I'm just the messenger.
Re: Hold on, Tex (Score:1)
(shrug) incompetent management tends to manage all parts... Incompetently.
That said, the early assertion was that "the cloud" would be safer because of redundancies. What wasn't highlighted was that from another perspective, it was concentrating points of failure/vulnerability.
Is one giant cloud service run for everyone by a professional data team more or less vulnerable collectively than a vast array of local networks/servers run by a bell curve of IT expertise from "really skilled" down to "I think Bill'
But they won't. (Score:2)
It seems to me that it's time to go back to the basics of having local servers and site separation to avoid situations where the whole company is impacted by a single central service going down.
Microsoft "cannot" do that because it would mean they would have to make their product modular rather than monolithic. Product modularity is considered to be a weakness by Microsoft because it mean that competitors could create replacement components with capabilities that supersede their own. Therefore any attempt at modularity must be so tightly integrated with other components that either will fail to function if the replacement is anything non-Microsoft. Additionally, any API interface must be unstable
Re: (Score:2)
It seems to me that it's time to go back to the basics of having local servers
It would also be nice if every company would not run the exact same software. Monocultures makes crops vulnerable to diseases, this is the same story for software.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd like to run Open VMS on a few servers.
Seems fine. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Mod parent -1 incoherent. MS and IBM are not good friends (or they weren't a couple of decades ago when I last checked).
Spyware manufacturer fingers Ransomware (Score:2)
Criminals gonna crim. They hate competition like everyone else.