Gloucester City Council boss says nobody safe from cyber attacks
The managing director of a council, who advises local authorities on cyber security, says no organisation is 100% safe from cyber attacks. Gloucester City Council's computer systems were crippled by hackers four years ago which cost about a million pounds to put right. Despite better protections and firewalls, there is a concern that the number of councils across the country make them a target because they are a government body, and there are many of them.Jon McGinty, managing director of Gloucester City Council, said organisations have a "duty" to minimise and mitigate risk.
He said: "I think we also have a duty to prepare for the possibility that the hackers do get through some chink in someone's armour and can attack us."
When the Gloucester City Council was hit by hackers in December 2021, the group demanded ransom payment for decrypting all of the council's servers and threatened to release sensitive data onto the "dark web". Mr McGinty said: "Everything became slower or harder to achieve.""One of the impacts that really affected Gloucester residents was land searches for people moving house, and our land searches system was beyond control – it wouldn't work. "So people were struggling to get a mortgage because they couldn't do a land search on a property they were looking to buy, so the whole of Gloucester's house market froze up for a number of months."
Mr McGinty told the BBC the gang targeting Gloucester City Council fell out with each other after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, so no further demands were made.Despite now being better protected than ever before, the city council still get thousands of attempted attacks on its IT system every week.The former head of the National Cyber Safety Centre (NCSC), Ciaran Martin, said his "biggest cyber-security worry" is the threat of simultaneous attacks on public services, like councils and hospitals, which has the potential to "wreck lives".According to the Information Commissioner's Office, there were 202 ransomware attacks on local councils in 2024.The government said it was "taking action to protect local councils by providing funding to increase their cyber defences".Mr Martin fears the attack on the council, and other public services, could have "shown hostile nation states how to disrupt our society".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Shame on you, Labour. How can you still sell arms to Israel?
Sandy Slater, Stirling. • What appalling, deeply distressing scenes were screened on Channel 4 News on Tuesday night with people in Gaza desperate for food being mown down by Israeli Defence Force bullets. Former UK Supreme Court senior judge Lord Sumption was interviewed on the programme and said he believed Israel was committing gross breaches of international humanitarian law in Gaza by killing on an indiscriminate scale. He also opined that genocide was the most plausible explanation for what was taking place. Gaza is now in ruins with most of its infrastructure, hospitals, schools and other public buildings shattered beyond repair. People are starving, hundreds are being slaughtered every week and children are suffering unimaginable horrors. Why oh why are our Labour MPs not up in arms; how can they watch this deteriorating catastrophe every night on TV news and do nothing? Why is Scottish Secretary Ian Murray not leading a delegation to Westminster to demand we stop supplying Israel with arms as of now? I truly despair. Alan Woodcock, Dundee. Read more letters Scotland could be Ground Zero With great fanfare, Keir Starmer and John Healey this week revealed that the mysterious magic money tree, never available for things that people need but always in full blossom for incendiary hardware, is once again being shaken down for "defence". Meanwhile, a former director of Russia analysis at the CIA tells the journal Foreign Policy that "the Russians recently revised their nuclear-use doctrine, and one of the things that they specifically said in there was that if there are attacks by an adversary on important state or military infrastructure that would disrupt responses, potentially by Russia's nuclear forces, that is potentially a trigger for Russian nuclear use". The fact that Ukraine is a non-nuclear nation becomes irrelevant, because it is perceived to be enabled by the US and Nato, which ARE nuclear powers, ergo justifying a potential nuclear response. Long ago, a Westminster political correspondent said that if there were to be a nuclear war, he was certain that in the aftermath I would be saying "I told you so" [as a former chair of CND]. It gives me no pleasure at all to say we are very possibly nearing that stage, and none of the things Messrs Healey and Starmer have announced would make any difference, even if we already had them. I don't need to remind anybody where Ground Zero in Europe is. Oh yes, aside from the US submarines currently in the Atlantic, Scotland would be the most significant target. In fact, in US nuclear war planning, it's always been "independent". It's called Unit 11. Marjorie Ellis Thompson, Edinburgh. PM is right over Russia Hugh Kerr's 'the Russians are not our enemies' claim (Letters, June 3 on the basis that 'they lost 20 million people helping us defeat Nazi Germany', is I suggest delusional. Firstly, Stalin, who murdered millions of his own citizens, not least in Ukraine, before the war, was an ally of Hitler, until Hitler betrayed him and invaded the Soviet Union. Then the Soviets became our allies on the basis that our enemy's enemy was our ally, but certainly not in reality our friend. Nor is Putin's dictatorship, murderers of civilians, abductors of children and suppressors of political opposition, the kind of friend I would wish to have. It is only too clear that his invasion of Ukraine is just the start of his dream of expanding westwards. Whatever Keir Starmer's failings, he is right to warn of the threat that Putin's Russia poses to European liberal democracy, of which the citizens of these islands are a fundamental part. By relying on American heft, Europe, UK included, has for too long under-invested in defence. With Donald Trump in the White House, those days are over. We must shoulder that burden ourselves because a government's first responsibility is the defence and safety of its people, and we know the price of appeasement. As the Romans had it: "Si vis pacem, para bellum' – if you want peace, prepare for war. Roy Pedersen, Inverness. Despairing of the SNP Where does one even begin with the SNP? No, to £2.5 million to one of Scotland's and the UK's cutting-edge employers ("SNP in munitions ban hypocrisy row over Ferguson Marine", heraldscotland, June 3); yes to £2.5m to promote a language that virtually no one in Scotland speaks or even comprehends. Then, the leader and his prospective candidate in the Hamilton by-election disagree on how to manage child poverty, an issue that's been an awful by-product of capitalism since that economic system became dominant ("SNP candidate Loudon takes different stance on the Scottish Child Payment from Swinney", The Herald, June 4). You'd think that a party who'd been in power for 18 years would have the perfect opportunity to come up with fresh ideas on how to eradicate child poverty, and many other of society's problems. But wait, if that government is the parochial SNP, whose total stock of ideas, strategies and tactics amounts to how to make Westminster and the UK look bad, then none of our problems is addressed, and you end up with our leading Scottish politician eating rusks with two-year-olds, rather than talking to fellow politicians about the defence of the UK which, last time I looked, included Scotland. Stuart Brennan, Glasgow. Capital woes will get worse Edinburgh's woes continue with the £1.7bn sea of debt that is only going to get bigger ("Edinburgh faced with £1.7 billion 'sea of debt' amid fears for services", The Herald, June 4) This is symptomatic of the general situation in Scotland as a whole under the less than careful guidance of the SNP. Large debts accrue because of reckless spending and suddenly taxes must rise to cover this but it is never quite enough and so the cycle goes on ever upward. There is a limit and it has already been breached. Edinburgh wants to introduce a visitor levy, and is also mooting a congestion zone tax on cars. Elsewhere, taxes on cruise ship passengers are in the pipeline. This will actually lead to the exact opposite effect, a drop in revenue as people go elsewhere. If Scots return an SNP administration in 2026 all this will continue until the penny finally drops with Holyrood, that is once it has sorted out its toilet rules properly. Scotland is going down the pan. Dr Gerald Edwards, Glasgow. Prime Minister Keir Starmer and with Defence Secretary John Healey (Image: PA) Flip side of the equation Once again Guy Stenhouse seems determined to present his jigsaw but with several key pieces missing ("Public sector workers who refuse to come into the office should be sacked", The Herald, May 31). He makes rather sweeping assumptions about Tesco and Aldi and suggests that their performance in one field somehow equips them, or other private sector organisations, to deliver important public services. To take the examples he cites, Tesco and Aldi can certainly be considered successful if profit levels are the only factor taken into account – £3.1 billion and £553 million respectively. At face value, he might be entitled to think he has a case. However he might want to consider other significant figures in this equation such as the fact that 30% of children in the UK are now living in poverty. He might also want to look at the exponential rise in food banks in recent years and the fact that over three million people last year were having to make use of them. While there are many factors giving rise to this situation, I believe it does call into question the "success" of the supermarkets if their pricing policies are putting their products beyond the reach of a significant number of people, particularly the most vulnerable. Mr Stenhouse might consider taking a more measured view the next time he wants to offer up another "private sector good/public sector bad" rant. Andy Crichton, Cupar.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Trump says Putin told him he'll 'have to respond' to Ukraine attack
"We discussed the attack on Russia's docked airplanes, by Ukraine," Trump said, referring to Ukraine's surprise drone attack that destroyed dozens of Russian bombers, "and also various other attacks that have been taking place by both sides." "President Putin did say, and very strongly, that he will have to respond to the recent attack on the airfields," Trump said. More: Russia's 'Pearl Harbor': What to know about Ukraine's audacious drone strike The Ukraine attack was the most damaging Ukrainian attack on Russia in the three years since Moscow invaded. It came after Russian forces launched a deadly barrage of hundreds of drones and missiles at Ukrainian cities on May 25, prompting Trump to say Putin "gone absolutely crazy." Later, Trump warned that Putin is "playing with fire" by refusing to engage in ceasefire talks. More: Russia demands harsh terms at Ukraine peace talks Trump, who has struggled to mediate meaningful peace negotiations between Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelenskyy, has recently taken more of a backseat. After Trump held a two-hour phone call with Putin on May 15, Trump said conditions for the next round of peace talks would be "negotiated between the two parties." Recounting his June 4 call with Putin, Trump also said they discussed Iran, which has just dismissed a proposal from the Trump administration for a deal that would prevent it from developing potential nuclear weapons technology. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei rejected a central U.S. demand that Iran abandon uranium enrichment, calling it "100%" against the country's interests. "I stated to President Putin that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon and, on this, I believe that we were in agreement," Trump said, adding that Putin suggested during that call that he participate in the discussions with Iran. "It is my opinion that Iran has been slowwalking their decision on this very important matter, and we will need a definitive answer in a very short period of time!" Trump said. Contributing: Reuters Reach Joey Garrison on X @joeygarrison.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Ukraine drone attack highlights worries about weaponized drones
"We may be at an inflection event," said Mai'a Cross, a professor of international affairs and diplomacy at Northeastern University. "The nature of warfare has transformed." The attack has been praised by supporters of Ukraine as an innovative, economical and surgical way to conduct warfare. It also highlights a longstanding worry that drones represent an emerging danger -- and years of efforts to combat that danger. How different are war drones from play drones? The U.S. military has been using expensive attack drones since at least 2001 during the war in Afghanistan. But the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 launched a new kind of drone warfare. A small nation suddenly found itself facing a much larger, richer and better-equipped country. "From my conversations with Ukrainians, the supply chain for the drones is simply commercial regular drones that we might see in daily life, but repurposed," said Cross. Combining these small, ready-made drones with new software and components turns them into killing machines at a fraction of the cost of traditional heavy military technology, and at breakneck speed. No. 1 threat: Drone attacks prompt urgent $500 million request from Pentagon "They even have tech experts embedded with military units who are able to make changes to the drones right there in the battlefield, updating the software and repairing on the fly," said Cross. The sheer number of small drones being deployed in Ukraine and Russia dwarfs their use anywhere else. Ukraine says it is producing up to four million drones annually, a number Russia says it can match. The June 1 attack may have used inexpensive drones but it was also meticulously planned for more than a year and a half, according to Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. "This war is still heavily dependent on manpower," said Cross. Could we be on the edge of drone terror? Americans are already primed to worry about drones, after a wave of mysterious sightings in New Jersey sparked fears and some hysteria in late 2024. (In January, President Trump said the "large numbers" of drones seen by residents were authorised to be flown by the FAA for research and other reasons. "This was not the enemy," Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said.) But experts, including the U.S. military, are already thinking deeply about drone risks -- from terrorism to pranks. "The simple act of spraying water or some other household cleaning agent over a crowded area would be enough to create panic," a U.S. military report issued in 2021 said. And swarms of drones could potentially overwhelm defensive capabilities, the report said. Both the military, government and private industry are studying and planning how to thwart such attacks. Most recently, on April 1 the Congressional Research Service issued a report on countering unmanned aircraft systems. Drones are regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration, which requires them to be registered and in some cases that drone pilots to be licenced. There are strict rules about where they can be flown, with airspace restrictions around airports, military bases and other "no drone" zones. Under FAA rules, all drones over 0.55 pounds are required to to broadcast identification signals, much like an airplane, to provide identification and location information, to allow for air safety and security. The FAA's Remote ID rule went into effect in March of 2024. Drone operators who conduct unsafe or unauthorized operations face fines up to $75,000 per violation. Dozens of startups have launched working in the anti-drone sector, enough that there is an annual conference where researchers gather to discuss the state of the art. Drones often used as a part of everyday life So far in the United States, drones are an inexpensive, convenient and hugely useful tool that have made significant inroads into many arenas that might seem improbable at first, said John Coggin, associate director of Virginia Tech's Mid-Atlantic Aviation Partnership program in Blacksburg, Virginia. Drones are used by farmers to inspect fields for insect damage and whether enough fertilizer has been applied, and to check irrigation lines. They've made a huge impact in industry, allowing critical infrastructure such as power lines, bridges and buildings to be cheaply and quickly inspected. Insurance companies use them for post-storm claim inspections. Realtors love them for shots that once would prohibitively expensive. They're a big help in search and rescue operations. As drier conditions have made fireworks displays potential wildfire risks, increasingly intricate and sophisticated drone light shows are replacing them. This is all possible because in 2016 the Federal Aviation Administration released new regulations that opened the door for commercial applications of drone technology, which have been updated multiple times since then. More rules have since been released, with new regulations in the works that would allow for still more uses. All these productive uses of drones come amid an international effort to reign in the potential threats to civilians -- and some are hopeful that the threat of weaponized drones won't spread. "There have been many cases in which we humans could have taken the route that would have led to disaster but we collectively chose not to," said Cross.
