Simple solution: edit the accounts and put the money back.
A bit of quantitative easing. Nobody will notice.
Hackers stole $10m from a Ukrainian bank by – yup, you guessed it – invading its computers and using the inter-bank transfer system SWIFT to shift their loot. The theft from an unnamed Ukrainian bank follows news of cyber-heists at other banks worldwide, most notoriously the lifting of $81m from an account held in New York …
So they attacked the bank computers and the mechanism used was the normal one for all transfers.
So SWIFT as such wasn't hacked? A bit like saying 'Openreach hackers' when someone's private online banking gets hit.
I guess 'Ukraine bank hacked' isn't much of a headline so SWIFT is in there to spice it up.
"Hackers stole $10m from a Ukrainian bank by – yup, you guessed it – invading its computers and using the inter-bank transfer system SWIFT to shift their loot."
Come off it, they didn't hack SWIFT and they didn't hack 'computers'. They hacked Windows desktops and used this to access the SWIFT financial messaging service .. 'internal terminals' 'ATM malware crooks'.. haaa
Semantics. The SWIFT system arguably extends to the terminal devices, networks and personnel authorised to use it. Without these SWIFT still exists as a central service but no money gets transferred. I don't know for sure but I'd expect the people who run SWIFT have the will and clout to ensure that these additional 'components' are up to scratch through compliance, due diligence and training and therefore if they aren't up to scratch SWIFT themselves may well have some responsibility.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020