Canadian insurer paid for ransomware decryptor. Now it's hunting the scum down

A curious tale of Bitcoin exchanges and the High Court

A Canadian insurance business struck by ransomware paid off the crooks via a cyber insurance policy – and their English reinsurers, having shelled out 109.25 Bitcoins, want it back from the alleged blackmailers.

After infection the unnamed Canadian company suffered a total lockdown of all of its systems and asked its reinsurance firm to pay the ransom so it could get back on its feet.

Paying off blackmailers holding a company to ransom is never advisable. Despite a negotiation that knocked the crooks down from an initial demand of $1.2m to $950k, the decryption tool provided had to be run on each and every affected device on the company's network.

It took five days to decrypt 20 servers and "10 business days" to unlock 1,000 desktop computers.

Neither company was going to pay out and forget the incident. The English reinsurer hired Chainalysis Inc, a "blockchain investigations firm", which eventually pinpointed the people responsible.

Although the full judgment was de-anonymised in January, having originally been handed down in December 2019, the judge did not lift an anonymity order on both the Canadian and English insurance companies. The latter, the plaintiff in the case, is designated as "AA" in the decision, while the "persons unknown who demanded Bitcoin", and "persons unknown who own/control specified Bitcoin" are classified as defendants 1 and 2. Two companies who operate a cryptocurrency exchange are designated defendants 3 and 4. Reporting restrictions have now been lifted.

Mr Justice Bryan of London's High Court said: "Whilst some of the Bitcoin was transferred into 'fiat currency' as it is known, a substantial proportion of the Bitcoin, namely, 96 Bitcoins, were transferred to a specified address. In the present instance, the address where the 96 Bitcoins were sent is linked to the exchange known as Bitfinex operated by the third and fourth defendants."


FBI softens stance on ransomware: it's (sort of) okay to pay off crims to get your data back


Bitfinex is a cryptocurrency exchange headquartered in the British Virgin Islands, though the court noted that one email address associated with the exchange was seemingly traced to China.

Mr Justice Bryan said: "At the present time there is no evidence that [Bitfinex] are themselves perpetrators of the wrongdoing, rather, it is said, they have found themselves the holder of someone else's property."

Nonetheless, the judge ruled that Bitfinex probably knew who the two alleged ransom receivers were, saying: "I have no doubt that Bitfinex has the ability to access its records and its KYC [know your customer, finance sector ID rules] material to identify the information that is sought" about the two alleged blackmailers.

In a statement Stuart Hoegner, Bitfinex's general counsel, told The Register: "Bitfinex has robust systems in place to allow it to assist law enforcement authorities and litigants in cases such as this. In this case we have assisted the Claimant to trace the stolen Bitcoin and we understand the focus of the Claimant's attention is no longer on the Bitfinex platform. It now appears Bitfinex is an entirely innocent party mixed up in this wrongdoing."

Payoffs are bad but we gotta be realistic

In October 2019 the American FBI softened its stance on paying off ransomware. At least one prominent infosec firm, Malwarebytes, reckons refusing to pay in all circumstances probably doesn't make a difference in this day and age.

Such a course of action is fraught with danger, however. A Scottish MSP was caught red-handed promising ransomware decryption services when in reality all they were doing was paying off the crooks and adding an eye-wateringly high margin. At least one study has found that less than half of companies paying off ransomware actually get their files back.

While the investigations in the High Court judgment above seem to be bearing fruit, keep in mind that insurance companies have a virtually guaranteed business model that leaves them drowning in cash. Tracking down crooks is expensive and civil legal action in the High Court comes in at five or six figures, assuming any judgment is enforceable. ®

Similar topics

Broader topics

Narrower topics

Other stories you might like

  • Experts: AI should be recognized as inventors in patent law
    Plus: Police release deepfake of murdered teen in cold case, and more

    In-brief Governments around the world should pass intellectual property laws that grant rights to AI systems, two academics at the University of New South Wales in Australia argued.

    Alexandra George, and Toby Walsh, professors of law and AI, respectively, believe failing to recognize machines as inventors could have long-lasting impacts on economies and societies. 

    "If courts and governments decide that AI-made inventions cannot be patented, the implications could be huge," they wrote in a comment article published in Nature. "Funders and businesses would be less incentivized to pursue useful research using AI inventors when a return on their investment could be limited. Society could miss out on the development of worthwhile and life-saving inventions."

    Continue reading
  • Declassified and released: More secret files on US govt's emergency doomsday powers
    Nuke incoming? Quick break out the plans for rationing, censorship, property seizures, and more

    More papers describing the orders and messages the US President can issue in the event of apocalyptic crises, such as a devastating nuclear attack, have been declassified and released for all to see.

    These government files are part of a larger collection of records that discuss the nature, reach, and use of secret Presidential Emergency Action Documents: these are executive orders, announcements, and statements to Congress that are all ready to sign and send out as soon as a doomsday scenario occurs. PEADs are supposed to give America's commander-in-chief immediate extraordinary powers to overcome extraordinary events.

    PEADs have never been declassified or revealed before. They remain hush-hush, and their exact details are not publicly known.

    Continue reading
  • Stolen university credentials up for sale by Russian crooks, FBI warns
    Forget dark-web souks, thousands of these are already being traded on public bazaars

    Russian crooks are selling network credentials and virtual private network access for a "multitude" of US universities and colleges on criminal marketplaces, according to the FBI.

    According to a warning issued on Thursday, these stolen credentials sell for thousands of dollars on both dark web and public internet forums, and could lead to subsequent cyberattacks against individual employees or the schools themselves.

    "The exposure of usernames and passwords can lead to brute force credential stuffing computer network attacks, whereby attackers attempt logins across various internet sites or exploit them for subsequent cyber attacks as criminal actors take advantage of users recycling the same credentials across multiple accounts, internet sites, and services," the Feds' alert [PDF] said.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022