Q. So it's gone more than a year since the attack on Synnovis. What has changed in your work in that time? What conclusions have you gotten from this situation?

A. We have become bigger. We became stronger. I will not deny that this story made us famous. People in law enforcement knew about our work and corporate bosses were afraid of us, but after Synnovis, we became known to the common person. It helps us do business. They're afraid of us.

Q. Why do you think it took so long to investigate this incident? 

A.  It's simple - 18 months is a real indicator of the effectiveness of our work. The software we use works very well. Also, I am sure that the announced results do not match the reality. Let me remind you that we made publicly available all the data we received from Synnovis, over 600GB. It contained information on all patients. Anyone could download and explore it. I'm sure Synnovis downloaded that data. Why couldn't they have notified all patients at once that their data had been compromised? Why did it take them over a year to report it? And even after that time, they absolutely could not recover the information that had been encrypted. Also, they could not figure out how the access was gained. This speaks volumes about the competence of their staff and the experts they invited.

Q.  Synnovis CEO Mark Dollar has some of the answers to these questions in an official statement: "It has taken more than a year of painstaking investigation to decipher and piece together the data stolen in this smash-and-grab cyberattack. I've seen first-hand the scale of the challenge - even for leading cyber experts - to tackle the random and fragmented nature of the data scraped from our systems."

A. Dollar is a very fitting last name for their CEO. I have another answer that Mark Dollar won't like. We are sure that the company's management used this situation to hide their mistakes and destroy evidence of their inefficiencies. You know, sometimes every company has a fire that destroys the financial statements. In this case, we just threw a match. Dollar could have put out the burgeoning flames and no one would have even known what happened. However, he refused to do so. 

Q. The Synnovis did indeed refuse to negotiate. They explained their decision as follows: "This decision… reflects our commitment to ethical principles and the rejection of funding future cybercriminal activities that threaten critical infrastructure, patient privacy, and national security."

A. So, let's get serious. On one side of the scale, Mr. Dollar had a ransom demand and a guarantee that the company would continue to operate without anyone finding out about the incident. The price of that decision was not high. I can't recall the specific amount right now, but we were talking about an amount that did not exceed 1% of their profits. The other tip of the scales was a complete shutdown and all the problems that we have seen. I have a question for Mr. Dollar. Why would you want to destroy a company, cause hardship for your employees and hundreds of thousands of UK residents? Why burn down something that is working well? There is no reason to do it. You are only stoking the flames to destroy evidence. There is and can be no other explanation. I'll say it again - we threw a match. Synnovis top management could have just put that flame out. However, they chose a can of gasoline.

Q. Speaking of damage. It's not just money and wasted time. There were reports that a man died because of your attack. Do you hold yourself responsible for his death?

A. First, we apologize to everyone who may have been affected by this attack. Especially people with sexually transmitted diseases whose data was made publicly available. You saw for yourselves that most of the “victims” were categorized as “low harm.” Now about this case. Indeed, a person died, and any death is terrible. However, did you see how our organization was linked to this case? “...a long wait for a blood test result due to the cyberattack.” Let's just imagine how it happened. A person needs help, they take a blood sample for analysis and send it to one of the Synnovis laboratories. There is no response from the laboratory for a long time. Couldn't the doctors use another laboratory? If it's a matter of life and death, did they really have to just wait? We checked - there are at least three laboratories near the hospital where this person was located that could have performed a similar test. The conclusion is that if this man's life depended on the results of this particular blood test, then British bureaucracy killed him. It is simply absurd to blame us. This situation is very telling. It seems that the failure of the Synnovis system was used to cover up all the problems and failures of the country's medical service. 

Q. However, attacking medical facilities is generally quite repulsive. Innocent people may suffer. Just imagine that after your attack, the intensive care unit stops working. Do you realize what the consequences would be in this case?

A. We have been operating for several years. Our portfolio includes several thousand cases. And not once has anything even remotely similar to what you are describing ever happened. We have strict principles that we follow. We carefully check each victim before encrypting their system. If a hospital has an emergency room or intensive care unit, we will not attack it. We always check whether there are similar medical facilities within an hour's drive of the target so that patients can be transported there. We have other criteria that I wouldn't like to discuss. But I can assure you that we do everything we can to avoid harming ordinary people. This is an important priority for us. However, we also believe that the healthcare system currently in place in the UK, the US, and many other countries is disgusting. Help only for money, only with insurance, medicine only for the rich - how could you even allow this? Every person has the right to the most modern and immediate medical care. This is an inalienable right of every person on the planet. However, this right has been taken away. If you don't have money, you die on the street. That's what we need to think about. These questions need to be asked. But not to us, of course. 

Q. Let's move on to another aspect of the Synnovis situation. Can you reveal any details about this attack today? How did you do it? 

A. As was the case a year ago, I am unable to discuss the technical details of our work. However, I can share some information. We exploited a zero-day vulnerability, gained access, elevated our privileges, and downloaded data - this is our standard protocol. It wasn't difficult to get inside; the company made some typical mistakes and left holes in its security. However, after that, we stayed inside for several weeks and watched to see what would happen. At one point, we even left a few clues for the company's IT department. We wanted to see if they would find us. We were prepared to just take the data and then allow them to discover us. However, the IT department was so bad that even after several obvious hints, they couldn't see us. Then we moved on to encryption. We were in no hurry. We only announced ourselves when we wanted to. In theory, we could have stayed in the Synnovis system for many months. 

Q. The company refused to inform patients directly that their data had been stolen. They said: "We have now begun notifying the organisations whose data was affected and expect to conclude this process by 21 November 2025." It might be because of safety reasons. What do you think?

A. We don't think so. This is an attempt to downplay the scale of the problem, as well as a clear desire on the part of the company to prevent affected patients from joining forces. Let me explain my point of view. We are seeing a trend. Employees and customers of companies that have been hacked often join forces to file a class action lawsuit against the company. Safekeeping personal data is one of the primary responsibilities of a company that collects personal data. If they violate this, a class action lawsuit is a logical step. The victims receive large compensation payments. This often leads to the bankruptcy of the company. I won't hide the fact that we are often approached by lawyers who handle class action lawsuits. And we are glad to cooperate. We confirm the fact of the breach and provide lawyers with the necessary information. Sometimes we can even add clients for lawyers. Synnovis understands that a class action lawsuit from 900,000 patients will destroy them. And they are trying to prevent this.