Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
The United States -based independent journalist refused to comply with a judicial judiciary in the United Kingdom, which was requested after his reports of a modern electronic attack in the UK giant HCRG.
Lawyer Bennsant Masonic, who served the court on February 28, on behalf of HCRG, asked Databreaches.net “Emper” Two articles That referred to The ransom attack on HCRG.
The lawyer office notice of Databreaches.net, which was seen by Techcrunch, stated that the associated with the associated with “HCRG” in the London’s Supreme Court of Justice “” preventing the publication or disclosure of the secret data stolen during the periods of a recent electronic ransomwani. “
The company’s speech states that in the case of your Databreaches.net sticks on the irritable matter, the site can be found in contempt for the court, which “may lead to imprisonment, a criminal fine or seize your assets.”
Databreaches.net, run by a journalist working under the pseudonym, refused to remove the leaflets, and also Details published on the Al -Zarja order in the Wednesday blog publication.
The opponents, citing a message from the Covington & Burling company, said that they will not comply with the matter on the basis that Databreaches.net is not subject to judicial authority in the United Kingdom and that legal reports under the first amendment in the United States, where Databreaches.net depends.
The exhibitions also noted that the text of the court is not specifically mentioned in Databreaches.net and does not refer to the specific articles concerned.
Legal threats and Demand We are Not uncommon In cyber security journalism, since reports often include detection of information that companies do not want to announce. However, restraining orders and legal demands about the risks or fears of legal repercussions are rarely published.
Details of the Zarbi provides a rare insight into how the UK law is used to issue legal demands to remove published stories that are critical or embarrassing for companies.
The law office letter also confirms that HCRG had a “ransom attack.”
HCRG, previously known as Virgin Care and one of the largest independent healthcare providers in the United Kingdom, confirmed on February 20. Investigation of cybersecurity accident After the Medusa Ransomware gang claimed responsibility for the breach, saying that it stole 2 terabytes of data from the company’s systems. HCRG has more than 5,000 employees and covers half a million patients across the United Kingdom.
When we got by Techcrunch, HCRG spokeswoman Alison Kalab said: “We can confirm that we have taken legal measures aimed at preventing the re -publication of any data accessed by the criminal group, to reduce the potential risks of those who have been affected.”
“We are investigating the accident with the support of external specialists, and we will notify (and inform us) any person who is affected when necessary based on our investigation.”
A Pinsent Masons spokesman, the HCRG law firm, did not present the comment at the time of publication.
According to the legal request, Pinsent Mason was killed on sites published on Databreaches.net, which stated that the Medusa Ransomware gang has imposed a credit for the cybersecurity HCRG and that the criminal gang was threatening to publish corridors of specific personal information and sensitive health data if it did not pay HCRG. The gang has published many screenshots of the stolen data on the dark web leakage site as evidence of their claims.
The publications published on Databreaches.net contains A lot of the same information She confirmed that Techcrunch and other ports independently.
According to the opponents, the Pinsent Masons sent a judicial order to the Databreaches.net field registrar, which in turn warned that Databreaches.net has been suspended if the publications are not removed. The opponents said that the field recorder was reversing the path later and refused to comment Databreaches.net.
HCRG publicly did not reveal the breach on its website. He said the opposition in Their blog is published on Wednesday In the absence of updates from HCRG, many details were covered about the electronic attack of the HCRG by independent journalists, including the cybersecurity blog SuspectWhich broke new details about the HCRG electronic attack.
The opponents said that the court’s order otherwise “will prevent the public from discovering that the breach was dangerous with the presence of many affected people” and “they can open the door for widespread censorship for journalists in the UK or anywhere else.”
The opponents said: “An email may be sent to any contact with the United Kingdom, and they are demanding the removal of previous reports on the data stolen from the British entities, or they can be banned from any future report on any stolen data from the UK’s entity.”