DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

A listing about a government victim disappeared from LockBit’s site. But why? (UPDATE1)

Posted on March 28, 2023 by Dissent

Update of March 28: It seems LockBit re-listed WCSO last night on their leak site and has dumped data from them, although the files do not seem to be downloading at this time.

When an entity has been the victim of a cyberattack, they’d be smart not to discuss the attack via their email system or voice system if those systems could be compromised and the attackers could be monitoring them.

But you’d think that there would be some records made involving incident response, such as notes or resolutions on whether the entity will pay a ransom demand or whom they are notifying, etc.  Could all records be on an external counsel’s server so as to protect it from monitoring and perhaps discovery in any litigation?  Perhaps.

But not any records at all? DataBreaches is aware of districts and entities that have ordered their consultants not to put any reports in writing because they might be discoverable, but to maintain no records at all?

Earlier this year, Washington County Sheriff’s Office (WCSO) in Chipley, Florida was the victim of a ransomware attack that disrupted the office for two weeks. LockBit claimed responsibility for the attack and threatened to leak data including information on hundreds of employees if WCSO didn’t pay up.  But Florida law prohibits the payment of ransom, and Sheriff Crews stated publicly that no ransom would be paid.

Instead of LockBit leaking the data as threatened, the entire listing for WCSO disappeared from the leak site at some point. The removal was first brought to DataBreaches’ attention by Brett Callow of Emsisoft.

Typically, removal only happens if the victim pays a ransom.  But Sheriff Crews had said no ransom would be paid, so why was the listing removed?

DataBreaches filed a public records request with WCSO. The following are the requests and WCSO’s responses:

  • Request: Sheriff Crews said the department or county would not pay any ransom demands. I am requesting copies of any correspondence concerning that decision.

WCSO’s response: Reference to your first request- no written or electronic correspondence exists. 

  • Request: Records showing what payments the WCSO or the county made as part  of their response to the cyberattack.

WCSO’s response: Please see the attached invoices.

Two attached invoices were for IT and database recovery services and totalled less than $20,000.

  • Request: Sheriff Crews reportedly requested $140,000 for additional budget for cybersecurity. There was to be a special meeting to consider that request. I am seeking any record(s) that itemizes or shows exactly to  whom $140,000 would be paid to, and for what.

WCSO’s response: Reference to your request to see who the additional budget allocation would go to- that will be “Inspired Technologies”. 

Inspired Technologies was one of the two firms paid as part of incident response. Their invoice for emergency IT and consulting services had been for $12,500.00.

  • Request: Any correspondence relating to the removal of WCSO files from  LockBit’s darkweb leak site.

WCSO’s response: Reference to the correspondence relating to the removal of WCSO files- no written or electronic correspondence exists.

Were there other records that DataBreaches failed to obtain because of wording of the requests? WCSO had not sought any clarification before responding to the requests.

In the absence of any records, we are left with at least three possible explanations for the removal of WCSO’s listing from LockBit’s site:

  1. WCSO paid ransom, despite publicly saying they wouldn’t.
  2. LockBit suddenly found God and decided to be nice and remove the listing.
  3. LockBit removed the listing because the data was sold privately.

(Update: the listing was restored after a mysterious disappearance).

LockBit never replied to an inquiry about the removal.

Did WCSO ever notify everyone whose data had allegedly been exfiltrated? DataBreaches does not know that, either.

If anyone has more information on this incident, please contact this site.


Related:

  • Attorney General James Announces Settlement with Wojeski & Company Accounting Firm
  • Romanian prisoner hacks prison IT system in plot made for a Netflix movie
  • JFL Lost Up to $800,000 Weekly After Cyberattack, CEO Says No Patient or Staff Data Was Compromised
  • John Bolton Indictment Provides Interesting Details About Hack of His AOL Account and Extortion Attempt
  • A business's cyber insurance policy included ransom coverage, but when they needed it, the insurer refused to pay. Why?
  • Before Their Telegram Channel Was Banned Again, ScatteredLAPSUS$Hunters Dropped Files Doxing Government Employees (2)
Category: Government SectorMalwareU.S.

Post navigation

← Norwegian data protection authority fines U.S. firm almost $240,000 for failure to notify within 72 hours
Illinois Gastroenterology Group settles class action litigation for undisclosed sum →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • Checkout.com Discloses Data Breach After Extortion Attempt
  • Washington Post hack exposes personal data of John Bolton, almost 10,000 others
  • Draft UK Cyber Security and Resilience Bill Enters UK Parliament
  • Suspected Russian hacker reportedly detained in Thailand, faces possible US extradition
  • Did you hear the one about the ransom victim who made a ransom installment payment after they were told that it wouldn’t be accepted?
  • District of Massachusetts Allows Higher-Ed Student Data Breach Claims to Survive
  • End of the game for cybercrime infrastructure: 1025 servers taken down
  • Doctor Alliance Data Breach: 353GB of Patient Files Allegedly Compromised, Ransom Demanded
  • St. Thomas Brushed Off Red Flags Before Dark-Web Data Dump Rocks Houston
  • A Wiltshire police breach posed possible safety concerns for violent crime victims as well as prison officers

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • OpenAI fights order to turn over millions of ChatGPT conversations
  • Maryland Privacy Crackdown Raises Bar for Disclosure Compliance
  • Lawmakers Warn Governors About Sharing Drivers’ Data with Federal Government
  • As shoplifting surges, British retailers roll out ‘invasive’ facial recognition tools
  • Data broker Kochava agrees to change business practices to settle lawsuit

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net
Security Issue: security[at]databreaches.net
Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight
Signal: +1 516-776-7756
DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.