Comment by myrandomcomment

I don't think that criminal negligence is the most helpful legal tool for incentivizing improved security. It's too hard to prove negligence.

Instead, there should be standard civil penalties for leaking various degrees of PII paid as restitution to the affected individual. Importantly, this must be applied REGARDLESS of "certification" or whether any security practices were "incorrect" or "insufficient". Even if there's a zero-day exploit and you did everything right, you pay. That's the cost of storing people's secrets.

This would make operating services whose whole "thing" is storing a bunch of information about individuals (like Canvas) much more expensive. Good! It's far to cheap to stockpile a ticking time bomb of private info and then walk away paying no damages just because you complied with some out-of-date list of rules or got the stamp of approval from a certification org that's incentivized to give out stamps of approval.

How could you possibly make it illegal to host insecure services? Is any service 100% secure? And if it were how would we know?

I do agree with the audit and punishments for clear failure to adhere to established standards.

If Boeing claimed a plane was airworthy, but it crashed because basic engineering controls were skipped, we have collectively put our faith in the NTSB to preserve evidence, run an independent technical investigation, etc. There is no such authority for software - most security auditors (SOC2, HITRUST, etc) are just looking at self-reported data.

Just take a look at the recent Epic vs. Health Gorilla lawsuit to see how nonexistent the protection is around exchanging your medical records, one of the most sensitive types of PII.

People who haven’t been hacked just haven’t been looked at. If someone wants to hack you, they will hack you. It’s really unfortunate that people have this level of confidence in their ability.

Here’s an example. https://hacks.mozilla.org/2026/05/behind-the-scenes-hardenin...

Has a corporate officer ever gone to jail or been meaningfully fined for a data breach?

> Incidents like this should be followed by an audit and charges being laid

What? Why? Who died? This whole thing is perfectly dealt with through civil process.

Criminals should focus on proven methods, like Steam Gift cards.

But, then, how would Trump’s family and cronies get paid?

[dead]

Ok, so we treat it as an act of war. Now what? Attack North Korea? Great, the entire city of Seoul gets shelled within five minutes of your attack and hundreds of thousands of innocent people die.

It's very easy to play with lives that aren't yours.

How do you know which country to blame? It is standard practice for foreign actors (or just hackers in general) to use proxies around the world to misdirect and insert false clues as to their origin. It could be an American teenager proxying through North Korea, and it could be a North Korean proxying through another American teenager's residential connection, there's no way to know.

They already do. This is what asymmetric warfare looks like, your weakest links will break in a time of crisis. Focusing on retribution for the Dunder Mifflin cyberattack is pointless, the adversarial motivation is purely to disrupt and extort.

The best response to a cyberattack on critical systems is to take security seriously. Document the offense, avoid the same mistakes and invest in penetration testing. Of course, nobody is incentivized to do that until they're attacked, so the cycle perpetuates itself.

> When will countries start treating cyberattacks as an act of war?

When appropriate. I.e. never.

interestingly, having actually done the law enforcement side of these investigations, 50% of them are local. And I understand that this is not 100% solution, but neither is any form of law enforcement, but that doesn't mean we should fail to attempt it.

Kids from the local uni having a lark, stalkers, vindictive ex employees, local gangs, criminals who understand their victims because they hail from the same community. These are your local hackers. Sift them from the nation states and international crime groups, then deal with the International as a matter of diplomacy. Because we do this so poorly locally, we have little ammunition to when it comes to diplomacy. "reduce attacks by your crime groups and we buy your natural gas, seel you wheat etc"

Want more motivation?- 75% of the local attacks by volume send funds back to terrorist or separatist organizations.

It is not an in-soluble problem. Sentences are a fraction of the answer, effective and receptive reporting processes are more important, then government backing for investigation and enforcement, then policy around home-team activities (ie don't do the bad things yourselves Mr Gov). Deterrence comes after all that.

Yeah, they identified themselves as ShinyHunters, and the IP they've put on the demonstration page is geocoded to Russia. Notice this is the same group responsible for the Infinite Campus hack last year.

Really, though, if you want someone to blame, Instructure is not a particularly compelling target. Let's review:

1. Iran is intentionally targeting infrastructure due to a war started by the current administration.

2. China is actively seeking corporate secrets to steal and commercialize for themselves, spurred by extreme protectionism and retaliatory tariffs.

3. North Korea is doing anything they can -- including just taking a remote job by proxy -- in order to extract any money.

4. And Russia is working with and aiding all of them, after everything else going on has forced the embargo to break.

5. All of this while completely alienating every single one of the United States' allies.

6. Meanwhile, the American DHS is currently shut down.

7. And this is after Trump cut funding and personnel for CISA severely enough they've had to end the contract with MS-ISAC, meaning all state and local entities can only remain in the organization if they foot the bill for it directly and CISA and other agencies responsible for cybersecurity are more thinly staffed than they have been in decades.

In short, the current administration systematically disassembled all the protections we have built over the last 100 years, and then placed infrastructure -- schools, in this case, but also power companies, water treatment facilities, communications companies, local governments, hospitals, food producers -- directly on the front lines of the modern geopolitical conflict.

That vast ocean that has kept us safe historically is a poor moat in the modern era.

Complete internet blockage of nations allowing the attacks. If foreign governments are you can always execute them. We are living in a different world where this is no longer a zero probability occurrence.

Uh, who determines that the infrastructure wasn't properly secured? Who is willing to risk prison because some intern accidentally committed an API key or made a dumb mistake. Conversely, what's the chances that no one actually gets prosecuted regardless of how sloppy their security practices are?

felony murder is pretty widely regarded as a leading factor in incredibly unjust prosecutions and sentencing decisions. perhaps not the best concept to build your ideas on top of.

The idea behind blocking ransom payments is to disincentivize asking for ransom. If you know it's almost impossible to pay ransom, the risk of not getting paid for your attack is much higher.