Analyzing Reporting on Ransomware Incidents: A Case Study

Abstract

Knowledge about ransomware is important for protecting sensitive data and for participating in public debates about suitable regulation regarding its security. However, as of now, this topic has received little to no attention in most school curricula. As such, it is desirable to analyze what citizens can learn about this topic outside of formal education, e.g., from news articles. This analysis is both relevant to analyzing the public discourse about ransomware, as well as to identify what aspects of this topic should be included in the limited time available for this topic in formal education. Thus, this paper was motivated both by educational and media research. The central goal is to explore how the media reports on this topic and, additionally, to identify potential misconceptions that could stem from this reporting. To do so, we conducted an exploratory case study into the reporting of 109 media articles regarding a high-impact ransomware event: the shutdown of the Colonial Pipeline (located in the east of the USA). We analyzed how the articles introduced central terminology, what details were provided, what details were not, and what (mis-)conceptions readers might receive from them. Our results show that an introduction of the terminology and technical concepts of security is insufficient for a complete understanding of the incident. Most importantly, the articles may lead to four misconceptions about ransomware that are likely to lead to misleading conclusions about the responsibility for the incident and possible political and technical options to prevent such attacks in the future.