Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Google Government Security Technology

Google Shut Out Baltimore Officials Using Gmail After Ransomware Attack (theverge.com) 82

The Baltimore city government is recovering from a devastating ransomware attack that has locked up its systems, but officials in the city faced a new problem today. As first reported by The Baltimore Sun, Google blocked city departments from using Gmail accounts created as a workaround. The Verge reports: On May 7th, a ransomware attack froze government systems, including email, and demanded the city hand over bitcoin to reverse the hack. Weeks later, the city is still recovering from the attack, which has also shut down systems for paying water bills and some other services. While officials deal with the problem, which could still take months to fix, some have reportedly signed up for free Gmail accounts to keep operating.

Gmail distinguishes between individual users and users in businesses and other organizations, requiring the latter to pay for the service. According to the Sun, which cited the mayor's office, Google's systems deemed the city officials to be part of an organization, and shut down the temporary accounts. Emails to the city health department, city council aides, and the mayor's office bounced on Thursday, according to the report from the Sun.
UPDATE: Google has since fixed the problem. "We have restored access to the Gmail accounts for the Baltimore city officials," the spokesperson said. "Our automated security systems disabled the accounts due to the bulk creation of multiple consumer Gmail accounts from the same network."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Shut Out Baltimore Officials Using Gmail After Ransomware Attack

Comments Filter:
  • Windows again (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Tough Love ( 215404 ) on Friday May 24, 2019 @09:19PM (#58651030)

    Excuse me, but this is Windows again. Each official involved in choosing Windows to handle the people's business should be immediately fired, drawn and quartered, and subjected to damnatio memoriae. [wikipedia.org]

    • by Anonymous Coward

      If you draw and quarter them first, then you do not need to fire them. The drawing and quartering will be sufficient.

      • If you draw and quarter them first, then you do not need to fire them. The drawing and quartering will be sufficient.

        I think you underestimate exactly how badly these people screwed up. Death by drawing and quartering is too quick and merciful.

    • by malkavian ( 9512 )

      Often what you find is:

      * Legacy. When the systems were originally built, there was no Linux. Once you have momentum, it's incredibly expensive to rebuild infrastructure (which is why developing countries investing in infrastructure get more modern stuff that the 'richer' countries).
      * Application ecosystem. When you're trying to run hundreds of applications (which often tie back into legacy), all of which run on Windows, and with no other OS supported, then it's a no brainer to choose Windows.
      * Applicatio

  • So, it really had nothing to do with them using it for business use... it was because they thought a herd of bots were mass creating email accounts. I love how things get misrepresented.
    • by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Saturday May 25, 2019 @12:10AM (#58651358)
      The algorithm is in place to catch businesses or organizations trying to use Gmail as their email service without paying for it. Part of the reason Gmail is free is because businesses and organizations which use it have to pay for it. That's really what the Baltimore government should be doing - paying Google for a G Suite account. Even if it's just for temporary use while they get back on their feet, a real organizational account comes with a bunch of sub-account management tools which frankly I think would be indispensable for an organization the size of a city government (I have a couple 10-user G Suite accounts that are grandfathered in from over a decade ago back when they were free.) Plus they'd be "paying their fair share" in helping keep Gmail and the other G Suite apps free for individual users.
      • by Anonymous Coward

        a real organizational account comes with a bunch of sub-account management tools which frankly I think would be indispensable for an organization the size of a city government

        On the other hand, one would think *backups* would be indispensable for any organization or individual of any size from one up.

        They didn't seem to put any value on backups, so it isn't exactly surprising they don't put any value on services like gmail either.

        Note the "they" I refer to is the IT leads for the city. Those are who should be paying for G-suite for use by those they serve after all.
        I'm not putting any blame on the workers that likely created the accounts in lieu of their IT support doing it for

      • by DarkOx ( 621550 )

        This I don't see in what way its good for Google or the public to let Baltimore be freeloaders. If nothing else if they actually paid for a gsuite account they probably quickly re-point their MX records and get mail at their real domain. Which would be enormously good for public trust.

        • by malkavian ( 9512 ) on Saturday May 25, 2019 @08:31AM (#58652260)

          From the chain of events, I'm seeing that people did what people do.
          There was an emergency situation (people not thinking quite straight, and seeing what they can do on the fly with nothing working, no procurement paths, nothing). Some bright spark said "Free Gmail! It doesn't take procurement paths to pull out of the bag, and it'll get us communicating and providing a service we need to be providing".
          I say top marks to that person. They overcame a temporary immediate and severe problem.
          This, of course, played fast and loose with Google's ToCs, which got automatically detected, and blocked. This is all part of business, and entirely rational.
          Now the Baltimore group likely talked to Google via some path, explained the situation and why this had happened, and Google seem to have said "Ok. We don't have to do it, but in the interests of keeping things running for you in times of trouble, we'll let you use the service".
          This is a positive mark for Google in their current turbulent times. It's how business works. Sometimes you have a handshake agreement that something can be allowed that lets someone get a great deal from you, or an exception to your usual processes when times are tough.

          It may well be that when the procurement path is open, Google will present a bill, and say "this is due for the coverage of the period of time you used the service". Which will be fine too.

          For now, both sides have an agreement that works for them, and both sides are happy to continue with whatever the terms of that agreement are. That's the world of business.

        • This I don't see in what way its good for Google or the public to let Baltimore be freeloaders.

          In the long run, you're right. In the short run, Google gets to be magnanimous (publicly, no less) and Baltimore gets to work around their mess. It's a win/win.

          In the medium term, perhaps Google also gets a new GSuite customer, after the city sees that (a) Google offers a nice set of tools and (b) is good to work with.

  • We'll just blame it on the algorithm.
  • Monorail *musicnotes*

  • This is going to become more and more of a problem as providers transition to cgn instead of ipv6, lots of users originating from the same source address.

  • You've got to cut it off at the source to keep it from spreading. Those virii can easily jump from computer to human, and THEN where will we be? Haven't you seen The Walking Dead? (Oh wait, that was a movie about employee overwork and burnout.)
  • Can anyone enlighten me as to why they don't pay the ransom and then back everything up right away, with a lesson well learned? Ugly and uncomfortable, but effective, no?

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...