Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Monday January 30 2017, @08:33AM   Printer-friendly
from the turn-a-blind-eye dept.

Over a hundred surveillance camera storage devices operated by the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia were hacked just days ahead of the Inauguration. Ransomware was found on some of the devices and officials said the extortion effort "was localized":

Hackers infected 70 percent of storage devices that record data from D.C. police surveillance cameras eight days before President Trump's inauguration, forcing major citywide reinstallation efforts, according to the police and the city's technology office. City officials said ransomware left police cameras unable to record between Jan. 12 and Jan. 15. The cyberattack affected 123 of 187 network video recorders in a closed-circuit TV system for public spaces across the city, the officials said late Friday.

Brian Ebert, a Secret Service official, said the safety of the public or protectees was never jeopardized. Archana Vemulapalli, the city's Chief Technology Officer, said the city paid no ransom and resolved the problem by taking the devices offline, removing all software and restarting the system at each site.

Also at The Hill.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 30 2017, @06:39PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 30 2017, @06:39PM (#460739)

    The GP has done some very selective editing. However, they do have a point you failed to address by pointing that out. The statement of the police asserted the following two facts:

    1) The cameras were disabled for a period of time (due to malware and/or and the restoration efforts).
    2) The safety of the public was never in jeopardy.

    The implication is that turning cameras off for a while does not put the public in jeopardy.

    This leaves out other possibilities (e.g. extra police on the street during the period of time, if cameras are off for x time it is safe but x+1 becomes dangerous, cameras can be off as long as people think they are on, etc). However, on the surface, the logic holds true.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by DannyB on Monday January 30 2017, @07:47PM

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 30 2017, @07:47PM (#460761) Journal

    If turning the cameras off does not put the public in jeopardy, then maybe they should just stay turned off.

    --
    To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.