Don’t Wanna Pay Ransom Gangs? Test Your Backups

Re:Don’t Wanna Pay Ransom Gangs? Test Your Backups by scruffyherder on Tuesday July 20, 2021 @05:55AM (#27891796)

And yet we mitigated y2k. All with publicly traded companies. The reward was simply being open for business on 1/1/2001 without slipping a beat.

Sometimes I think as an industry we hyped too much and over delivered giving the impression that it was no big deal.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Don’t Wanna Pay Ransom Gangs? Test Your Backups by ziml77 on Tuesday July 20, 2021 @07:17AM (#27892366)

The difference is that we knew that the Y2K bug was coming. It was a given that we were going to end up reaching 1/1/2000. Here, it's not a given that backups will ever need to be touched.

Spending a lot of money to fix something that is known will happen is easy to justify. If you don't do it, you will end up losing significant amounts of money.

For something that isn't guaranteed to happen, it's harder to justify putting a lot of money into it. What is the value of doing thorough testing of backups if they're never actually accessed? One could argue that it's purely a waste of money.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Don’t Wanna Pay Ransom Gangs? Test Your Backups by hutzlibu on Tuesday July 20, 2021 @08:39AM (#27892997)

"One could argue that it's purely a waste of money. "

A counterargument would be just any of the frequent news articles about company X having to pay Y millions or lost such and such money.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Don’t Wanna Pay Ransom Gangs? Test Your Backups by mypalmike on Tuesday July 20, 2021 @07:39AM (#27892506)

* 1/1/2000

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Don’t Wanna Pay Ransom Gangs? Test Your Backups by bluGill on Tuesday July 20, 2021 @09:39AM (#27893553)

Actually 3 dates, that was one. 2000 was a leap year and lots of systems got that wrong. 9/9/1999 was sometimes used as a can't happen date as well.

[ Parent | on HN ]