Why Modern Cyber Extortion Has Turned Incident Response Into a Public Relations Crisis

One of the most difficult parts of responding to a ransomware attack or data breach is no longer just containment, recovery, or forensics.

It is communication.

Modern ransomware operations have evolved far beyond simple encryption events. Today’s threat actors increasingly rely on double-extortion tactics: stealing sensitive data before encrypting it, then threatening to publicly release that information if negotiations fail or payment is not made.

This creates a major challenge for organizations during incident response because the attacker may effectively become the first party to publicly announce the breach.

The organization is suddenly forced into a reactive posture, often before the investigation is complete, before legal review is finalized, and before leadership has aligned on messaging.

In many cases, the organization loses control of the narrative before it has fully understood the incident itself.

The New Reality of Ransomware Leak Sites

Most major ransomware groups now operate public leak sites where they name victims and threaten or release exfiltrated data.

Groups such as Akira, LockBit, Play, Black Basta, and others have normalized this tactic as part of their extortion strategy.

The process is often predictable:

• The organization detects suspicious activity or encryption
• Incident response begins
• Negotiations may or may not occur
• The ransomware group posts the victim publicly
• Cyber threat intelligence platforms detect the listing
• News outlets and social media amplify the event
• Customers, suppliers, and partners begin asking questions

At that point, the incident is no longer purely technical.

It becomes operational, legal, regulatory, reputational, and customer-facing simultaneously.

When Threat Intelligence Platforms Spread the Story Faster Than the Victim Organization

One of the overlooked realities of modern incident response is the role of cyber threat intelligence (CTI) platforms.

Organizations today use platforms and services that continuously monitor:

• Ransomware leak sites
• Dark web forums
• Telegram channels
• Criminal marketplaces
• Data dump repositories
• Threat actor communications

When a company appears on a ransomware leak site, those platforms often generate alerts almost immediately.

That means your customers, suppliers, vendors, cyber insurance partners, and even competitors may learn about the incident before your organization makes any public statement.

In some situations, external parties may reach out asking for confirmation while your own internal investigation is still underway.

This dramatically changes the pressure and timing surrounding breach communications.

The Risks of Saying Nothing

Organizations often delay public communication for understandable reasons.

The investigation may still be ongoing.
The scope may still be unclear.
Legal teams may want to avoid over-disclosure.
Executives may fear reputational damage or liability.

All of those concerns are valid.

However, silence creates risk too.

If a threat actor publicly claims responsibility and the organization says nothing, customers and stakeholders may assume the company is:

• Unaware of the incident
• Attempting to hide information
• Unprepared to respond
• Lacking transparency
• Minimizing the impact

Even worse, if the organization issues an absolute denial too early and evidence later emerges showing exfiltrated data, credibility can erode quickly.

Trust becomes very difficult to recover once stakeholders believe they were misled.

The “MyPillow” Example and Why This Happens So Frequently

A recent headline highlighted this exact problem:

“MyPillow listed on ransomware gang’s leak site, but denies it has been breached.”

Whether a company has fully confirmed its impact at the time of the statement is often beside the point from a public perception standpoint.

Once a ransomware group publicly names the organization, the communication challenge has already started.

Customers do not distinguish between:

• encryption versus exfiltration
• attempted compromise versus confirmed compromise
• investigation in progress versus completed investigation

What they hear is simple:

“A ransomware group says your company was breached.”

That immediately creates pressure on executive leadership, security teams, legal counsel, public relations, customer support teams, and regulators.

Lessons Learned From Real-World Incident Response

Having served as a vCISO and incident response commander during ransomware events, I have seen firsthand how quickly communication challenges can escalate once a victim organization is publicly named.

In one Akira ransomware event, the threat actor publicly identified the victim organization, and CTI monitoring quickly amplified awareness of the incident.

The situation immediately shifted from a primarily technical response into a broader crisis management scenario involving:

• Customer trust
• Executive communications
• Vendor concerns
• Regulatory considerations
• Internal employee communications
• Legal coordination
• Reputation management

The organization was no longer responding solely to the attack itself.

It was responding to public awareness of the attack.

That distinction matters.

Why Communication Planning Must Be Part of Incident Response

Many organizations prepare extensively for:

• backups
• disaster recovery
• containment
• endpoint response
• forensics
• business continuity

Far fewer adequately prepare for public communication during a ransomware extortion event.

That is a mistake.

Communication strategy should be treated as a core security control and an essential component of incident response readiness.

Organizations should have predefined plans for:

Holding Statements

Prepare legally reviewed statements in advance that can acknowledge an incident investigation without overcommitting to facts not yet confirmed.

Executive Decision Trees

Define who decides:

• When to notify
• When to go public
• Who communicates externally
• What triggers escalation

Threat Intelligence Monitoring

Proactively monitor ransomware leak sites and dark web sources so leadership is not surprised by public exposure.

Internal Communications

Employees should understand:

• What can be shared
• What should not be shared
• How to respond to customer inquiries
• Where media requests should be routed

Customer and Vendor Messaging

Customer-facing teams should not be learning about the incident from social media before leadership briefs them internally.

Transparency Does Not Mean Having Every Answer Immediately

One of the biggest misconceptions during incident response is that organizations must either:

• Remain completely silent, or
• Provide full disclosure immediately

Neither extreme is realistic.

The most effective approach is credible transparency.

That means communicating:

• what is known
• what is still being investigated
• what actions are being taken
• when additional updates will be provided

Stakeholders generally understand that investigations take time.

What damages trust is appearing evasive, unprepared, or inconsistent.

In Modern Ransomware Events, Trust Is a Security Control

Security leaders often focus heavily on technical controls:

• EDR
• SIEM
• MFA
• backups
• segmentation
• vulnerability management
• identity protection

Those controls absolutely matter.

But during a ransomware or breach event, communication becomes a control too.

Your ability to maintain customer confidence, reduce confusion, manage expectations, and preserve credibility can significantly influence the incident’s long-term business impact.

Because in today’s threat landscape, the first public announcement of a breach may not come from the victim organization.

It may come from the attacker.

Organizations should prepare accordingly.

Final Thoughts

Ransomware response is no longer just an IT or security problem.

It is a business resilience problem.

Organizations that prepare only for technical recovery but fail to address the communication and transparency challenges posed by modern extortion campaigns may find themselves losing control of the narrative before the investigation is even complete.

The best time to determine how your organization will respond publicly to a ransomware leak site listing is before it ever happens.

Not after your company’s name appears on one.

You may find our article on what to do in the first 60 minutes of a ransomware attack interesting, or this resource listing bad-actor groups tracked by Unit 42/Palo Alto.

#CyberSecurity #Ransomware #DataBreach #IncidentResponse #CyberResilience #ThreatIntelligence #InformationSecurity #CyberRisk