NHS Suffers Huge Cyber Attack Affecting Hospitals’ Emergency Care

find em and kill em

Lord Foul wrote:find em and kill em

What is the possible death toll due to this appalling hack?

If this is the Russians (just guessing), its time we stopped fucking around with Putin and hit back at this Dictator

Saw that. Makes me angry too.

To me, this attack says two things I haven't been hearing others say:

1) Microsoft has way too much influence over the world.

2) Microsoft's strategy of foisting a new operating system on the world every so many years, whether entities want it or can afford it or not, is deeply flawed. Apparently a lot of the NHS computers affected were still running Windows XP because there was no budget for upgrades.

I think if someone can keep using old technology effectively, they should be able to do that. Microsoft could have prevented this attack by providing free security updates to XP -- which it just proved it could do, by doing exactly that in response to the attack.

NHS cyber attack: ‘Accidental hero’ who halted ransomware gets week off work as reward

Chantal Da SilvaSunday 14 May 2017 12:33 BST
The 22-year-old cyber security analyst who “accidentally” managed to halt the spread of malicious ransomware that has affected hundreds of organisations, including the NHS, has been given a week off from work as a reward.

The researcher, who tweets under the name MalwareTech and works for security firm Kryptos Logic, told the BBC he was able to stop vast numbers of attacks by the WannaCry ransomware by buying a domain name hidden in the program for $10.69 (£8.29).

The domain name appears to have been written into the software by hackers as a kill switch for the malware.

The analyst had taken a week off from work, but decided to investigate the ransomware after hearing about the global cyber-attack that sent organisations like the NHS into meltdown, with hospitals across the UK having turn away non-critical patients and resort to pen and paper.

Now, he says his boss has rewarded him with another week off for all his hard work.

“The attention has been slightly overwhelming,” the 22-year-old told the BBC.

“The boss gave me another week off to make up for this train-wreck of a vacation.”

The analyst has been hailed as an “accidental hero” after saying his discovery of the ransomware kill switch “was actually partly accidental”.

He wrote on his website: “I woke up at around 10am and checked onto the UK cyber threat sharing platform where I had been following the spread of the Emotet banking malware, something which seemed incredibly significant until [Friday].

“There were a few of your usual posts about various organisations being hit with ransomware, but nothing significant... yet. I ended up going out to lunch with a friend, meanwhile the WannaCrypt ransomware campaign had entered full swing.”

The analyst said his attempt to stop the ransomware attack by registering the domain name he found “was not a whim”.

“My job is to look for ways we can track and potentially stop botnets,” he wrote. “So I’m always on the lookout to pick up unregistered malware ... domains. In fact,I registered several thousand such domains in the past year.”

The analyst said he was “jumping around with excitment” when he realised his hunch that the domain name might work as a kill switch was correct.


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/accidental-hero-halts-ransomware-wannacry-attack-nhs-a7734876.html?cmpid=facebook-post

Jeremy Hunt 'ignored warning signs' before cyber-attack hit NHS

Shadow health secretary says concerns were repeatedly flagged about outdated computer systems that are vulnerable to attack

The shadow health secretary, Jonathan Ashworth, said concerns had been flagged repeatedly about the NHS’s outdated computer systems, which he said had left it vulnerable to the attack. In a letter to Hunt on Saturday, he wrote: “As secretary of state, I urge you to publicly outline the immediate steps you’ll be taking to significantly improve cybersecurity in our NHS. The public has a right to know exactly what the government will do to ensure that such an attack is never repeated again.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/may/13/jeremy-hunt-ignored-warning-signs-before-cyber-attack-hit-nhs?CMP=share_btn_tw


Still run on Windows XP, Government stopped the contract for security in 2015, although warned what could happen, so left it wide open.

Letter from 2014 warning them:






Safe and Stable!   Any stable they were in would be filled with bucking broncos.

What does it say about people when they blame problems politically on why it happened and never on those who made it happen?

Go figure

Now let me see, who is in charge of the NHS - the Health Secretary. Who was warned that the NHS computer records were unsecure - the Health Secretary. Who cancelled the contract with Microsoft to keep them secure - the Health Secretary. Who refused to provide funding to upgrade them - the Health Secretary. Who has done a disappearing act again so he can't be questioned - the Health Secretary. Who fell flat on his face not doing the job he gets a lot of money for - the Health Secretary. Who does Dodgy think should not share any of the blame - the Health Secretary Typical fucking Tory.

And BTW, WHAT OTHER SYSTEM ALSO RUNS ON THE OUTDATED WINDOWS XP TRIDENT

sassy wrote:Now let me see, who is in charge of the NHS - the Health Secretary.   Who was warned that the NHS computer records were unsecure - the Health Secretary.   Who cancelled the contract with Microsoft to keep them secure - the Health Secretary.   Who refused to provide funding to upgrade them - the Health Secretary.   Who has done a disappearing act again so he can't be questioned - the Health Secretary.   Who fell flat on his face not doing the job he gets a lot of money for - the Health Secretary.   Who does Dodgy think should not share any of the blame - the Health Secretary   Typical fucking Tory.

How to prove my point.
You want to blame those who should have prevented this?
You have my blessings, but what on earth do you have to say to those who hacked into hospital databases, that we have no idea of what the cost of life is yet for doing so.

The anger here by sassy is directed at those they claim should have prevented.


She fails to take Ben's point on windows protecting customers.

She instead uses this to make a political point and backs this up with hate and confirmation bias.

I mean has Sassy here actually expressed hate Towards the people that actually did this?

Go figure

sassy wrote:And BTW, WHAT OTHER SYSTEM ALSO RUNS ON THE OUTDATED WINDOWS XP    TRIDENT

Is that why no accidents happen off this?

Maybe you should stop reading the beano sassy

When in trouble divert eh Dodgy.

It's bad enoough that the bastards who did this will probably never be caught. It's bad enough that they have caused mayhem and that people will suffer because of it. But then you find out that it could have been prevented and then dickheads try to pretend that the people who could have prevented it have no responsiblity in order to wiggle even when they knew it could happen and people would suffer and die if it did, that's just fucking sick.

Trident wasn't targetted. However, if you think running a nuclear submarine on an out of date computer programme is a good idea, you are even more nuts than I know you are.

sassy wrote:When in trouble divert eh Dodgy.

It's bad enoough that the bastards who did this will probably never be caught.   It's bad enough that they have caused mayhem and that people will suffer because of it.   But then you find out that it could have been prevented and then dickheads try to pretend that the people who could have prevented it have no responsiblity in order to wiggle even when they knew it could happen and people would suffer and die if it did, that's just fucking sick.    

Trident wasn't targetted.   However, if you think running a nuclear submarine on an out of date computer programme is a good idea, you are even more nuts than I know you are.

Sassy again expands on my point

She blames those for being naive to such attacks

Not the people who committed the ATTACK

I guess by her methodology, Islam is the cause of present day terrorism

Good thing I do not agree with her

She then invokes submarines based off a false premise of which she has no scooby doo over.

Here is how you  test stupidity.

What network is US or British Submarines set up to sassy?

You have 60 seconds  to deny you using google

So does anyone ever make money from this ransomware? Do people really pay to access their files? It seems that it can be over-ridden anyway.

Raggamuffin wrote:So does anyone ever make money from this ransomware? Do people really pay to access their files? It seems that it can be over-ridden anyway.

Quick thinking interruption Rags   

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:So does anyone ever make money from this ransomware? Do people really pay to access their files? It seems that it can be over-ridden anyway.

Quick thinking interruption Rags   

I am genuinely interested though. Some have said the NHS wasn't specifically targeted any more than any other organisation. Is it done via an email attachment?

If nobody makes any money, why do they bother doing it? If they do make money, can't they be traced?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:



Quick thinking interruption Rags   

I am genuinely interested though. Some have said the NHS wasn't specifically targeted any more than any other organisation. Is it done via an email attachment?

If nobody makes any money, why do they bother doing it? If they do make money, can't they be traced?

Credit where credit is due. You did make it interesting based off the issue and not politically.


You made a good point on money and incentive.

Ask yourself what incentive would you have to have to be something you would never achieve under Marxism?

Ben Reilly wrote:To me, this attack says two things I haven't been hearing others say:

1) Microsoft has way too much influence over the world. Or not enough They have been saying for years that it was moving to unsupported. Because see 2

2) Microsoft's strategy of foisting a new operating system on the world every so many years, whether entities want it or can afford it or not, is deeply flawed. Apparently a lot of the NHS computers affected were still running Windows XP because there was no budget for upgrades. They move to stop support because it is not possible to continue to support for it indefinitely, eventually the core elements of the operating system are endangered of becoming 'spaghetti' in other words just a jumbled mess of 'additions' which makes if functionally insecure.

I think if someone can keep using old technology effectively, they should be able to do that. Microsoft could have prevented this attack by providing free security updates to XP -- which it just proved it could do, by doing exactly that in response to the attack. it was lucky that in this case it worked for a specific target much like preventing a terrorist attack it is far easier to respond once it is identified than just protect against all possible attacks

I disagree, It did offer free upgrades to windows 10 and versions of win 7 previously.
it is sheer laziness, people just fighting change because they don't want to learn to push a new button and cost cutting that have stopped organizations preforming the regular upgrades which they are supposed to maintain security levels, that is like NOT servicing a car and then complaining that it stopped working. Everyone from the manufacturer to the mechanic told you it would happen so you can't complain when it happens.

This is entirely the fault of the organizations still running XP.

It is no different than continuing to use any other item once it has had a security recall or consuming food years past its used before date and then whinging that you got sick.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:So does anyone ever make money from this ransomware? Do people really pay to access their files? It seems that it can be over-ridden anyway.

Quick thinking interruption Rags   

I am genuinely interested though. Some have said the NHS wasn't specifically targeted any more than any other organisation. Is it done via an email attachment?

If nobody makes any money, why do they bother doing it? If they do make money, can't they be traced?

it is a simple hack that has just targeted insecure machines (running XP)
it has just highlighted how poorly the NHS and many UK services are being run.

preventing these attacks is part of my job, and just following the basic industry standards would prevent this malware.


in the case of trident it is on an offline network (or it better bloody be or the IT department should be shot) so it is secure for outside attacks, but in saying that there are still exploits if one were to get onto the secured network, based on they very poor level of cyber security shown in UK government departments it is rather concerning.