Businesses to notify government about ransom payments in cyber crime crackdown
New measures would ban public sector bodies and operators of critical national infrastructure from paying ransom demands to hackers.
The Home Office said this would help 'smash the cyber criminal business model' and make UK public services and businesses a less attractive target for ransomware groups.
Nearly three-quarters of respondents involved in a public consultation, opened in January, showed support for the proposal, it said.
Furthermore, under the proposals, businesses not covered by the ban would be required to notify the government if they intended to pay a ransom.
The Government hopes this would allow it to give affected businesses advice and support, including alerting them if such a payment would risk breaking the law by sending money to sanctioned cyber criminal groups, many of whom are based in Russia.
Ransomware refers to software used by cyber criminals to access the computer systems of its victims, which can then be encrypted or data stolen until a ransom is paid.
M&S was targeted by hackers in April, forcing it to shut down its website for six weeks and costing the business an estimated £300 million.
Co-op's hackers accessed data from all 6.5 million of its members (Co-op/PA)
Co-op also had to shut off parts of its IT systems after a cyber attack that resulted in all 6.5 million of its members' personal data being stolen – including names, addresses and contact information.
M&S's chair Archie Norman said earlier this month that the hack was believed to be instigated by hacking group Scattered Spider and an Asia-based ransomware operation named DragonForce.
He refused to say whether or not the retailer had paid a ransomware demand following the attack, but said the 'damage had been done' once its systems were compromised.
Security minister Dan Jarvis said: 'Ransomware is a predatory crime that puts the public at risk, wrecks livelihoods and threatens the services we depend on.
'That's why we're determined to smash the cyber criminal business model and protect the services we all rely on as we deliver our plan for change.'
The chief executive of the British Library, Rebecca Lawrence, said it had been the 'victim of a devastating ransomware attack in October 2023'.
'The attack destroyed our technology infrastructure and continues to impact our users, however, as a public body, we did not engage with the attackers or pay the ransom,' she said.
'Instead, we are committed to sharing our experiences to help protect other institutions affected by cyber crime and build collective resilience for the future.'
Co-op's chief executive Shirine Khoury-Haq said she welcomed the Government's proposals, adding: 'We know first-hand the damage and disruption cyber attacks cause to businesses and communities.'
The package of measures could also result in the introduction of a mandatory reporting regime, which would give law enforcement greater intelligence to track down perpetrators, according to the Home Office.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Glasgow Times
13 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Electric coach operator set to create dozens of new jobs in Paisley
Ember Core has been granted planning permission, subject to conditions, to develop the facility on brownfield land to the southwest of St James Interchange. The Edinburgh-based company, an electric coach operator, will use the site as a base for charging its vehicles and expects it to support approximately 60 new jobs, including driving roles, hub support and operational staff. An operational statement submitted with the application explained: 'Ember, the UK's first 100% electric coach operator, based in Edinburgh, plans to establish a new hub at West March Road, Paisley, to be used as a base for charging its vehicles. 'This hub will allow Ember to establish new long-distance bus services from Glasgow Airport and Glasgow, for example, to Aberdeen, Inverness and Edinburgh.' It continued: 'Once fully operational, Ember anticipates that this site will support approximately 60 new jobs. 'This includes driving roles as well as hub support and operational staff. All roles will pay well above the real living wage. 'The proposed site is a brownfield site close to Junction 29 of the M8. 'The location has been chosen due to its proximity to Glasgow Airport and Paisley, both attractive passenger destinations.' Ember will primarily use the site for parking and charging buses and there will be a total of 18 parking bays, including space for up to 11 buses to charge simultaneously. During the day, an average of two to four buses are likely to be charging at any one time, with all bays only occupied overnight. The company also intends to add staff parking, a welfare unit for driver breaks and a gantry bus wash to make sure its fleet can be cleaned frequently. The nearest residential properties, which are found at St James Avenue, are located in excess of 200 metres to the southeast of the site. A report of handling by the council's chief planning officer said: 'Given the nature and scale of the proposed development, it is considered that it would be compatible with the surrounding area without detriment to amenity.'
Auto Blog
15 minutes ago
- Auto Blog
The New Hyundai Elexio Offers More Than Expected for A Reasonable Price
By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. View post: Amazon Is Selling a 'Spacious' $36 Tool Bag for 47% Off, and It 'Can Store Just About Anything' This one's for those who want to know the nitty-gritty of what makes the 2026 Cadillac Lyriq-V worth the extra $12k-$20k. Beyond the F40 and 250 GTO, there's a world of Ferrari to discover. We highlight 5 forgotten Ferrari models that are now surprisingly undervalued and deserve more love. Like every other automaker, Hyundai recognizes that China is an important market. Claiming the vehicle as 'a new starting point,' the company recently revealed the electric Elexio SUV, which has shown impressive capabilities in early safety testing. Hyundai acknowledged that China is a 'must-fight place' for global companies, and the Elexio may help it compete with more established homegrown brands in the country. The automaker is targeting a CLTC driving range of 435 miles (roughly 320 miles using EPA testing) and says the SUV offers fast-charging, advanced technologies, and more. Early crash tests show the new SUV to offer above-average safety, with Hyundai citing its 'God's Hand' high-strength steel plating as a major factor in the tests. It features 360-degree body reinforcements and floor beams for better structural rigidity. Low-temperature battery evaluations found that the Elexio lost less driving range in low-temperature conditions, and it had no trouble operating in ultra-cold conditions. The Elexio is a bit smaller than the Tesla Model Y and will be offered in two configurations, including single- and dual-motor options. The single-motor powertrain offers 214 horsepower, and the dual setup has 312 hp. Both configurations will use LFP batteries from BYD's battery subsidiary, FinDream. Source: Image: Hyundai Hyundai also touted the crossover's ride quality, saying it has 'the highest suspension configuration in its class.' It features advanced dampers and hydraulic bushings, and the automaker said it reworked the suspension system more than 300 times before settling on the configuration. The Elexio is known as the Ioniq 5 of China, so it's unlikely that we'll see it on American streets anytime soon. It's built in China through Hyundai's partnership with BAIC and is expected to have a reasonable starting price of under $20,000. Hyundai plans to launch the vehicle in the third quarter of this year. About the Author Chris Teague View Profile
The Independent
43 minutes ago
- The Independent
Heathrow's third runway plan is wrong – and not just because of noise and pollution
Here we go again. To say there is a deja vu aspect to the latest proposal to build Heathrow's third runway is an understatement. For reasons that are not clear, Sir Keir Starmer has determined the airport's expansion to be a key plank in the government's economic growth strategy. Seemingly, he did not take into account the issues that grounded the plans in the past, as far back as 1968 – namely, Heathrow's unfortunate and unavoidable proximity to the M25, the rivers and their valleys that cross that part of west London, the additional noise pollution, and the need for improved and costly transport links to and from the centre of the capital that will result from the vast uplift in passengers. On the constant sound from the increased number of planes landing and taking off, the prime minister will insist that great technological strides have been made in curbing the din. It is true that new aircraft are less noisy. However, they are still extremely audible, there will be more of them, and they will be flying over a heavily residential area. As for the rest, nothing has altered fundamentally, environmentally and logistically, since Heathrow last submitted a scheme, pre-Covid. Inflation means the bill is now an eye-watering £49bn. The bill, ultimately, will be borne by the air passenger, and Heathrow is already the most expensive airport in the world. Will the airlines and their customers stomach at least a doubling in charges? There is the thorny problem, too, of public transport to and from London. The London mayor will be expected to find a way to enable an extra 60 million people a year to use Heathrow. Transport for London is strapped for cash, struggling to upgrade the Tube network. How the additional demand will be met is not clear. What has shifted as well is the nature of air travel. Post-pandemic, business travel is down and looks unlikely to recover – that, certainly, is what the industry is saying. During the outbreak, holding meetings remotely came into its own and employers took a hard look at their budgets – Zoom or Teams often represent a better alternative in executive time and expense. That therefore raises a major doubt about one of the main claims made for Heathrow's extension. It is said to be necessary to enhance London and the UK's standing in the business world, but how, if the commercial users are not there? There has been movement too, and not of the positive kind, in attitude towards Heathrow the operator. The power outage that shut down the plum in Starmer's vision for resurgence and global acclaim was a shocking episode; it not only highlighted a neglected infrastructure but also a failure of management. Thomas Woldbye, who is seeking permission to build this national project, is the same boss who slept through the night as Britain's busiest airport ceased to function. Heathrow's reputation in the sector was already poor, but this took it to a new low. Woldbye has an idea that is different from the one previously suggested, which is to build the third runway over the M25, taking the motorway underneath – and all without any disruption to road users. This is fanciful even without a track record that hardly inspires confidence. Which raises another question. Why? Why should Heathrow as a company get to preside over the airport's improvement and reap the benefits? If we're all agreed that it is a vital national asset, holding a pivotal place in the economy, then why should the incumbent be in charge, not to mention entrusted, with its development? Those who wax lyrical about Heathrow's importance like to reminisce about how Britain led the transformation of international aviation. Boosting the airport is seen as completing that journey. It is the case that we once did. That was in the Margaret Thatcher era, when British Airways was freed from the shackles of state ownership. Thatcher did more than that, though. She enabled and encouraged competition, giving a steer to the challengers and disruptors, notably to Richard Branson at Virgin and Michael Bishop at British Midland. The newly privatised BA was forced to raise its game, and together, these three set new standards. There appears to be an assumption that Woldbye's company must be given the job. But there is another option. Surinder Arora, the self-made billionaire who has masterminded the building of leading hotels at Heathrow and other airports and is a substantial Heathrow landowner, has his own remedy. His is much cheaper, envisaging a shorter runway that does not affect the M25. It is easy to dismiss Arora. But he is popular with the airlines, he rails rightly against Heathrow's pricing, and he knows a thing or two about customer service. He also possesses heavyweight advisers in the shape of Bechtel, the US engineering, construction and project management giant. He deserves to be taken seriously. Heathrow needs a competitor. Likewise, if neither the airport operator nor Arora is selected and the third runway is again kiboshed, then surely serious thought must be given to expanding rival airports. Heathrow has been resting on its laurels for too long. As for Starmer, he perhaps should ask himself how it is that someone who professes to be forensic legally is so capable of displaying rushes of blood to the head politically. Giving Heathrow such prominence smacks of impetuousness. He's done it and has been left with an almighty headache.
