Evitare il Ransomware Cover Piergiorgio Venuti

Avoid Ransomware: That’s why it’s best not to take any risks

Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

ransomware gangs have been targeting businesses in recent times, demanding larger payments than they can extort from consumers. The plan was very successful. According to the new data, 70% of the attacked companies paid the ransom to get their data back. Avoiding ransomware is a necessity, these figures implicitly prove it. If such a large number of companies pay, it is because the risk is too great in terms of reputation and collateral economic losses.

Researchers from IBM Security’s X-Force interviewed executives of 600 companies of all sizes and found that organizations affected by ransomware choose to pay in most cases.

Data shows that 20% of compromised organizations paid ransoms of more than $ 40,000 and 25% paid between $ 20,000 and $ 40,000. These numbers are much higher than that. that consumers typically pay, which is usually around $ 500-1,000, depending on the variant of the ransomware.

When targeting businesses, hacking groups aim to paralyze organizations by encrypting financial data , customer databases, sales data and other vital information .

Avoid ransomware – the risks of attacks

In the past year, a number of organizations have been hit by severe ransomware attacks, including hospitals, universities and others. For example, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority was hit by a ransomware attack during the weekend of Thanksgiving, a very important holiday in the US. The attack paralyzed desktops within the agency and forcing officials to shut down the automatic ticket machines. Needless to say, this attack resulted in a huge loss of assets and a ransom demand.

Getting malware into public organizations isn’t as difficult as you might think, and is often done with a single email .

In their attacks on networks, cybercriminals seek out the servers that keep the business running and encrypt critical assets rather than working on enterprise-wide endpoints.

The access point is usually a phishing email with a malicious attachment, sent to the mailbox of a employee . In most cases, the attachment is a Microsoft Office document asking the victim to enable macros . Clicking the macro enable button is often a trivial matter for those uninformed users who just want to get rid of the warning at the top of the document . The malware runs as soon as the user allows the macros to run. The ransomware can also arrive through any other attachment or through exploit kits which facilitate infection without any special action on your part.

Economic losses

The amount of money businesses have paid to get their data back shouldn’t come as a surprise considering the alternative. As is increasingly the case, the attack doesn’t just put key the data until payment of the requested amount. The threat continues with the release of data if you do not agree to pay a second ransom. In the end two ransoms will be paid and in any case there is no certainty that the data will not be disclosed. (It is said double extortion attack).

Many organizations keep these attacks under wraps to avoid public humiliation and loss of customer confidence . Data from the IBM survey shows that 29% of executives in large corporations would pay more than $ 50,000 to retrieve financial data.

Law enforcement, including the FBI, and security experts advise ransomware victims not to pay, for a variety of reasons. First, there is no guarantee for the attacker to deliver the decryption key. Second, the ransomware’s profits help fund other cybercrime operations.

How to defend yourself to avoid ransomware

Phishing remains one of the key methods by which a ransomware attack is attempted. With the recent increase in remote working, it is imperative to reiterate the importance of being careful when opening emails and attachments . If employees are suspicious of something, they should report it.

Organizations should also make sure they have a good patching strategy and apply the latest security updates . This prevents cybercriminals from taking advantage of known vulnerabilities to distribute malware.

Regularly updating backups should be a priority , because if the worst happens and your organization falls victim to a ransomware attack, your network can be restored without paying the ransom.

Cyberfero provides solutions for the situations listed through the SOCaaS service. You can ensure the protection of a Security Operation Center without having to invest in its initial funding .

The system controls the actions of the computers connected to the network using an artificial intelligence. As soon as a suspicious, even legitimate, action is detected, the technicians are alerted who can investigate the nature of the fact . The new generation SIEM systems and behavioral analysis via UEBA , work together to offer 360 ° security.

Cyberfero also provides intelligent anti-ransomware backup systems via Acronis Cyber Protect Cloud . With this tool at your side, business and customer data are safe. Any attack attempt is identified and mitigated immediately, meanwhile, thanks to dynamic backups, the data is immediately restored .

Avoiding ransomware can be relatively easy – just pay attention to every operation you perform on your computers. Unfortunately, sometimes this is not enough. This is the time when having invested in a quality safety system will make a difference.

For questions or requests do not hesitate to contact us, we will be happy to answer your questions and propose a solution tailored to your needs.

Share


RSS

More Articles…

Categories …

Tags

RSS feed: Unknown Feed Unknown Feed

RSS feed: Full Disclosure Full Disclosure

  • Apache Struts2 Core Arbitrary Code Execution via OGNL Sandbox Escape November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description Apache Struts2 Core version 7.4.0 and below attempt to prevent arbitrary code execution via Object-Graph Navigation Language (OGNL) through several different mechanisms but only in a cursory fashion -- the libraries only guard against immediate calls evaluated by the OGNL engine via `SecurityMemberAccess`, but an allowed […]
  • Apache Struts2 Core TokenHelper Token Cryptographic Timing Side-Channel November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description The Apache Struts2 Core 7.4.0 and below performs session token comparisons cryptographically insecure early-exit comparison functions (e.g., `!=`, `memcmp`, byte-by-byte loops with `break`) that return as soon as the first mismatched byte is encountered. The execution time of the comparison is therefore proportional to the number […]
  • Apache Struts2 Spring Plugin Uses a Previously Closed Resource November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description The Apache Struts2 Spring Plugin opens a Spring `ApplicationContex` via a try-with-resources block and, outside of said block, then continues to use the closed resource, resulting in an uncaught `IllegalStateException`. This particular issue prevents proper functionality and indicates poor code quality and code review standards and […]
  • Apache Struts2 Core Integer Overflow November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description Apache Struts2 Core version 7.4.0 and below fails to properly prevent integer overflows, causing wrap-arounds and other issues on a downstream forced casting into types smaller than `BigInteger`. Importantly, this finding underscores why all applications using Struts and other such platforms should perform their own input […]
  • Apache Struts2 Core Cross-Origin Protection Exemption Miskeyed to a Deployment-Wide Path November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description Apache Struts2 Core version 7.4.0 and below's `FetchMetadataInterceptor`, `CoepInterceptor`, and `CoopInterceptor` each compare their `exemptedPaths` configuration -- a per-interceptor-reference, administrator-supplied set of paths intended to exempt specific actions from the corresponding cross-origin protection -- against `HttpServletRequest.getContextPath()`. `getContextPath()` is fixed for the entire deployed web...
  • Apache Struts2 REST Plugin Fails to Properly Parse Chunked Requests November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description The Apache Struts2 REST Plugin's (version 7.4.0 and below) `ContentTypeInterceptor.intercept(ActionInvocation)` only deserialises a request body and enforces the `struts.rest.content.maxLength` bound when `HttpServletRequest#getContentLength()` returns a positive value. `getContentLength()` returns `-1` whenever the `Content-Length` header is absent, which normal and appropriate for any Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP)...
  • Apache Struts2 REST Plugin Untrimmed `Accept` Header Tokens Break Content Negation Fallback November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01Description The Apache Struts2 REST Plugin's `DefaultContentTypeHandlerManager.getHandlerForResponse(HttpServletRequest, HttpServletResponse)` splits the `Accept` header on commas and passes each resulting token directly to `findHandler(String)` without trimming leading or trailing whitespace. `findHandler(String)` only retries a trimmed lookup when a token contains a semicolon (`;`), so a token that merely carries […]
  • Apache Struts2 JSON Plugin Insecure Deserialisation -- Object Deserialisation Element-Count Limit Bypass November 2, 2026
    Posted by Daniel Owens via Fulldisclosure on Nov 01As of the current versions of the Apache Struts2 JSON Plugin (e.g., version 7.4.0 and the 7.5.0 snapshot dated 28 October 2026), attackers can bypass the element-count limit purported to protect Object deserialisation added to said code as part of the WW-5618 and S2-072 "hardening controls". Please […]
  • [0day-rubbish] NETGEAR RAX120 V1.2.5.18 authenticated SOAP InstallApp OS command injection to root-configured web-stack execution (6.8 Medium; conditionally 7.2 High with management exposure) October 29, 2026
    Posted by disclosure via Fulldisclosure on Oct 280day Rubbish Research Team is publicly disclosing a vulnerability in NETGEAR RAX120 (Nighthawk AX12) firmware V1.2.5.18, the WiFi 6 consumer router from NETGEAR (United States), built on the Qualcomm IPQ8074 platform. The administrative web plane of this firmware generation is a lighttpd server fronting the vendor's DNI-framework CGI […]
  • [0day-rubbish] Raritan PX3 PDU G4 firmware 4.3.14 command injection in the ping and traceroute diagnostics through an inverted hostname-validation return check (8.8) October 29, 2026
    Posted by disclosure via Fulldisclosure on Oct 280day Rubbish Research Team is publicly disclosing a vulnerability in the Raritan PX3 PDU G4, firmware version 4.3.14, the intelligent rack power distribution unit from Raritan, a Legrand company (United States). A low-privilege authenticated session converts one diagnostics request into operating-system command execution in the product's web-service context, […]

Customers