US Congress report warns over costs of cyberattacks
WASHINGTON - Associated Press
Cyberattacks cost the United States between $57 billion and $109 billion in 2016, a White House report has said, warning of a “spillover” effect for the broader economy if the situation worsens.
A report by the White House Council of Economic Advisers sought to quantify what it called “malicious cyber activity directed at private and public entities” including denial of service attacks, data breaches and theft of intellectual property, and sensitive financial and strategic information.
The report noted particular concern over attacks on so-called critical infrastructure, such as highways, power grids, communications systems, dams, and food production facilities which could lead to important spillover impacts beyond the target victims.
“If a firm owns a critical infrastructure asset, an attack against this firm could cause major disruption throughout the economy,” the report said.
It added that concerns were high around cyberattacks against the financial and energy sectors.
“These sectors are internally interconnected and interdependent with other sectors as well as robustly connected to the internet, and are thus at a highest risk for a devastating cyberattack that would ripple through the entire economy,” it said.
The report offered little in the way of new recommendations on improving cybersecurity, but noted that the situation is hurt by “insufficient data” as well as “underinvestment” in defensive systems by the private sector.
The document was issued a day after US officials blamed Russia for last year’s devastating “NotPetya” ransomware attack, calling it a Kremlin effort to destabilize Ukraine which then spun out of control, hitting companies in the US, Europe and elsewhere.
“If they have funding needs, they may conduct ransom attacks and electronic thefts of funds,” the report said.
But threats were also seen from “hacktivists,” or politically motivated groups, as well as criminal organizations, corporate competitors, company insiders and “opportunists.”