Login
Login

Talk:WannaCry ransomware attack#Requested move 15 May 2017

{{Talk header}}

{{User:MiszaBot/config

| algo = old(30d)

| archive = Talk:WannaCry ransomware attack/Archive %(counter)d

| counter = 3

| maxarchivesize = 75K

| archiveheader = {{Aan}}

| minthreadstoarchive = 1

}}

{{British English}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1=

{{WikiProject Business |importance=Mid}}

{{WikiProject Computing |importance=High |security=y |security-importance=High |software=y |software-importance=Mid}}

{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=Low}}

{{WikiProject Economics |importance=Low}}

{{WikiProject Internet |importance=Mid}}

}}

{{Top 25 Report|May 14 2017 (6th)}}

{{ITN talk|date=13 May 2017}}

{{Not forum}}

{{Broken anchors|links=

  • {{Section link|Proactive cyber defence|Measures}} The anchor (,Proactive cyber defence,) has been deleted by other users before.

}}

Reference 69 is a malicious website

ttps://transparencyreport.google.com/safe-browsing/search?url=http:%2F%2Fwww.antiy.net%2Fp%2Fin-depth-analysis-report-on-wannacry-ransomware%2F

83.249.122.50 (talk) 11:08, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Romanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs

The list of hacked organisations lists the Romanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. However, citation 141, which is used for the Romanian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, cites a cybernetic attack that was sent as a fake message from NATO. While the date of the cited article corresponds with the WannaCry attack, the article does not mention WannaCry and does not mention ransomware at all. Furthermore, a Google search does not show any evidence of the virus being WannaCry.

Scarletwill (talk) 09:13, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Possible change to a sentence in paragraph one

I'd like to change sentence 5 of paragraph 1.

"These patches were imperative to an organization's cyber-security but many were not applied because of neglect, ignorance, mismanagement, or a misunderstanding about their importance."

The information is good but it is phrased a little oddly. I think a shorter sentence might be more clear.

For example we could do something like:

"These patches were imperative to organizations' cyber security but many were not implemented due to general ignorance of their importance."

If anyone has other suggestions or thinks the current phrasing is good, please reply!

Thanks,

Its choosday innit (talk) 22:54, 13 September 2021 (UTC)