Ransomware is 35 years old and now a billion-dollar problem. Here’s how it could evolve
As the ransomware industry evolves, experts are predicting hackers will only continue to find more and more ways of using the technology to exploit businesses and individuals.
Seksan Mongkhonkhamsao | Moment | Getty Images
Ransomware is now a billion-dollar industry. But it wasn’t always that large — nor was it a prevalent cybersecurity risk like it is today.
Dating back to the 1980s, ransomware is a form of malware used by cybercriminals to lock files on a person’s computer and demand payment to unlock them.
The technology — which officially turned 35 on Dec. 12 — has come a long way, with criminals now able to spin up ransomware much faster and deploy it across multiple targets.
Cybercriminals raked in $1 billion of extorted cryptocurrency payments from ransomware victims in 2023 — a record high, according to data from blockchain analysis firm Chainalysis.
Experts expect ransomware to continue evolving, with modern-day cloud computing tech, artificial intelligence and geopolitics shaping the future.
How did ransomware come about?
The first event considered to be a ransomware attack happened in 1989.
A hacker physically mailed floppy disks claiming to contain software that could help determine whether someone was at risk of developing AIDs.
However, when installed, the software would hide directories and encrypt file names on people’s computers after they’d rebooted 90 times.
It would then display a ransom note requesting a cashier’s check to be sent to an address in Panama for a license to restore the files and directories.
The program became known by the cybersecurity community as the “AIDs Trojan.”
“It was the first ransomware and it came from someone’s imagination. It wasn’t something that they’d read about or that had been researched,” Martin Lee, EMEA lead for Talos, the cyber threat intelligence division of IT equipment giant Cisco, told CNBC in an interview.
“Prior to that, it was just never discussed. There wasn’t even the theoretical concept of ransomware.”
The perpetrator, a Harvard-taught biologist named Joseph Popp, was caught and arrested. However, after displaying erratic behavior, he was found unfit to stand trial and returned to the United States.
How ransomware has developed
Since the AIDs Trojan emerged, ransomware has evolved a great deal. In 2004, a threat actor targeted Russian citizens with a criminal ransomware program known today as “GPCode.”
The program was delivered to people via email — an attack method today commonly known as “phishing.” Users, tempted with the promise of an attractive career offer, would download an attachment which contained malware disguising itself as a job application form.
Once opened, the attachment downloaded and installed malware on the victim’s computer, scanning the file system and encrypting files and demanding payment via wire transfer.
Then, in the early 2010s, ransomware hackers turned to crypto as a method of payment.
In 2013, only a few years after the creation of bitcoin, the CryptoLocker ransomware emerged.
Hackers targeting people with this program demanded payment in either bitcoin or prepaid cash vouchers — but it was an early example of how crypto became the currency of choice for ransomware attackers.
Later, more prominent examples of ransomware attacks that selected crypto as the ransom payment method of choice included the likes of WannaCry and Petya.
“Cryptocurrencies provide many advantages for the bad guys, precisely because it is a way of transferring value and money outside of the regulated banking system in a way that is anonymous and immutable,” Lee told CNBC. “If somebody’s paid you, that payment can’t be rolled back.”
CryptoLocker also became notorious in the cybersecurity community as one of the earliest examples of a “ransomware-as-a-service” operation — that is, a ransomware service sold by developers to more novice hackers for a fee to allow them to carry out attacks.
“In the early 2010s, we have this increase in professionalization,” Lee said, adding that the gang behind CryptoLocker were “very successful in operating the crime.”
What’s next for ransomware?
As the ransomware industry evolves even further, experts are predicting hackers will only continue to find more and more ways of using the technology to exploit businesses and individuals.
By 2031, ransomware is predicted to cost victims a combined $265 billion annually, according to a report from Cybersecurity Ventures.
Some experts worry AI has lowered the barrier to entry for criminals looking to create and use ransomware. Generative AI tools like OpenAI’s ChatGPT allow everyday internet users to insert text-based queries and requests and get sophisticated, humanlike answers in response — and many programmers are even using it to help them write code.
Mike Beck, chief information security officer of Darktrace, told CNBC’s “Squawk Box Europe” there’s a “huge opportunity” for AI — both in arming the cybercriminals and improving productivity and operations within cybersecurity companies.
“We have to arm ourselves with the same tools that the bad guys are using,” Beck said. “The bad guys are going to be using the same tooling that is being used alongside all that kind of change today.”
But Lee doesn’t think AI poses as severe a ransomware risk as many would think.
“There’s a lot of hypothesis about AI being very good for social engineering,” Lee told CNBC. “However, when you look at the attacks that are out there and clearly working, it tends to be the simplest ones that are so successful.”
Targeting cloud systems
A serious threat to watch out for in future could be hackers targeting cloud systems, which enable businesses to store data and host websites and apps remotely from far-flung data centers.
“We haven’t seen an awful lot of ransomware hitting cloud systems, and I think that’s likely to be the future as it progresses,” Lee said.
We could eventually see ransomware attacks that encrypt cloud assets or withhold access to them by changing credentials or using identity-based attacks to deny users access, according to Lee.
Geopolitics is also expected to play a key role in the way ransomware evolves in the years to come.
“Over the last 10 years, the distinction between criminal ransomware and nation-state attacks is becoming increasingly blurred, and ransomware is becoming a geopolitical weapon that can be used as a tool of geopolitics to disrupt organizations in countries perceived as hostile,” Lee said.
“I think we’re probably going to see more of that,” he added. “It’s fascinating to see how the criminal world could be co-opted by a nation state to do its bidding.”
Another risk Lee sees gaining traction is autonomously distributed ransomware.
“There is still scope for there to be more ransomwares out there that spread autonomously — perhaps not hitting everything in their path but limiting themselves to a specific domain or a specific organization,” he told CNBC.
Lee also expects ransomware-as-a-service to expand rapidly.
“I think we will increasingly see the ransomware ecosystem becoming increasingly professionalized, moving almost exclusively towards that ransomware-as-a-service model,” he said.
But even as the ways criminals use ransomware are set to evolve, the actual makeup of the technology isn’t expected to change too drastically in the coming years.
“Outside of RaaS providers and those leveraging stolen or procured toolchains, credentials and system access have proven to be effective,” Jake King, security lead at internet search firm Elastic, told CNBC.
“Until further roadblocks appear for adversaries, we will likely continue to observe the same patterns.”
Formula One F1 – United States Grand Prix – Circuit of the Americas, Austin, Texas, U.S. – October 23, 2022 Tim Cook waves the chequered flag to the race winner Red Bull’s Max Verstappen
Mike Segar | Reuters
Apple had two major launches last month. They couldn’t have been more different.
First, Apple revealed some of the artificial intelligence advancements it had been working on in the past year when it released developer versions of its operating systems to muted applause at its annual developer’s conference, WWDC. Then, at the end of the month, Apple hit the red carpet as its first true blockbuster movie, “F1,” debuted to over $155 million — and glowing reviews — in its first weekend.
While “F1” was a victory lap for Apple, highlighting the strength of its long-term outlook, the growth of its services business and its ability to tap into culture, Wall Street’s reaction to the company’s AI announcements at WWDC suggest there’s some trouble underneath the hood.
“F1” showed Apple at its best — in particular, its ability to invest in new, long-term projects. When Apple TV+ launched in 2019, it had only a handful of original shows and one movie, a film festival darling called “Hala” that didn’t even share its box office revenue.
Despite Apple TV+ being written off as a costly side-project, Apple stuck with its plan over the years, expanding its staff and operation in Culver City, California. That allowed the company to build up Hollywood connections, especially for TV shows, and build an entertainment track record. Now, an Apple Original can lead the box office on a summer weekend, the prime season for blockbuster films.
The success of “F1” also highlights Apple’s significant marketing machine and ability to get big-name talent to appear with its leadership. Apple pulled out all the stops to market the movie, including using its Wallet app to send a push notification with a discount for tickets to the film. To promote “F1,” Cook appeared with movie star Brad Pitt at an Apple store in New York and posted a video with actual F1 racer Lewis Hamilton, who was one of the film’s producers.
(L-R) Brad Pitt, Lewis Hamilton, Tim Cook, and Damson Idris attend the World Premiere of “F1: The Movie” in Times Square on June 16, 2025 in New York City.
Jamie Mccarthy | Getty Images Entertainment | Getty Images
Although Apple services chief Eddy Cue said in a recent interview that Apple needs the its film business to be profitable to “continue to do great things,” “F1” isn’t just about the bottom line for the company.
Apple’s Hollywood productions are perhaps the most prominent face of the company’s services business, a profit engine that has been an investor favorite since the iPhone maker started highlighting the division in 2016.
Films will only ever be a small fraction of the services unit, which also includes payments, iCloud subscriptions, magazine bundles, Apple Music, game bundles, warranties, fees related to digital payments and ad sales. Plus, even the biggest box office smashes would be small on Apple’s scale — the company does over $1 billion in sales on average every day.
But movies are the only services component that can get celebrities like Pitt or George Clooney to appear next to an Apple logo — and the success of “F1” means that Apple could do more big popcorn films in the future.
“Nothing breeds success or inspires future investment like a current success,” said Comscore senior media analyst Paul Dergarabedian.
But if “F1” is a sign that Apple’s services business is in full throttle, the company’s AI struggles are a “check engine” light that won’t turn off.
Replacing Siri’s engine
At WWDC last month, Wall Street was eager to hear about the company’s plans for Apple Intelligence, its suite of AI features that it first revealed in 2024. Apple Intelligence, which is a key tenet of the company’s hardware products, had a rollout marred by delays and underwhelming features.
Apple spent most of WWDC going over smaller machine learning features, but did not reveal what investors and consumers increasingly want: A sophisticated Siri that can converse fluidly and get stuff done, like making a restaurant reservation. In the age of OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Anthropic’s Claude and Google’s Gemini, the expectation of AI assistants among consumers is growing beyond “Siri, how’s the weather?”
The company had previewed a significantly improved Siri in the summer of 2024, but earlier this year, those features were delayed to sometime in 2026. At WWDC, Apple didn’t offer any updates about the improved Siri beyond that the company was “continuing its work to deliver” the features in the “coming year.” Some observers reduced their expectations for Apple’s AI after the conference.
“Current expectations for Apple Intelligence to kickstart a super upgrade cycle are too high, in our view,” wrote Jefferies analysts this week.
Siri should be an example of how Apple’s ability to improve products and projects over the long-term makes it tough to compete with.
It beat nearly every other voice assistant to market when it first debuted on iPhones in 2011. Fourteen years later, Siri remains essentially the same one-off, rigid, question-and-answer system that struggles with open-ended questions and dates, even after the invention in recent years of sophisticated voice bots based on generative AI technology that can hold a conversation.
Apple’s strongest rivals, including Android parent Google, have done way more to integrate sophisticated AI assistants into their devices than Apple has. And Google doesn’t have the same reflex against collecting data and cloud processing as privacy-obsessed Apple.
Some analysts have said they believe Apple has a few years before the company’s lack of competitive AI features will start to show up in device sales, given the company’s large installed base and high customer loyalty. But Apple can’t get lapped before it re-enters the race, and its former design guru Jony Ive is now working on new hardware with OpenAI, ramping up the pressure in Cupertino.
“The three-year problem, which is within an investment time frame, is that Android is racing ahead,” Needham senior internet analyst Laura Martin said on CNBC this week.
Apple’s services success with projects like “F1” is an example of what the company can do when it sets clear goals in public and then executes them over extended time-frames.
Its AI strategy could use a similar long-term plan, as customers and investors wonder when Apple will fully embrace the technology that has captivated Silicon Valley.
Wall Street’s anxiety over Apple’s AI struggles was evident this week after Bloomberg reported that Apple was considering replacing Siri’s engine with Anthropic or OpenAI’s technology, as opposed to its own foundation models.
The move, if it were to happen, would contradict one of Apple’s most important strategies in the Cook era: Apple wants to own its core technologies, like the touchscreen, processor, modem and maps software, not buy them from suppliers.
Using external technology would be an admission that Apple Foundation Models aren’t good enough yet for what the company wants to do with Siri.
“They’ve fallen farther and farther behind, and they need to supercharge their generative AI efforts” Martin said. “They can’t do that internally.”
Apple might even pay billions for the use of Anthropic’s AI software, according to the Bloomberg report. If Apple were to pay for AI, it would be a reversal from current services deals, like the search deal with Alphabet where the Cupertino company gets paid $20 billion per year to push iPhone traffic to Google Search.
The company didn’t confirm the report and declined comment, but Wall Street welcomed the report and Apple shares rose.
In the world of AI in Silicon Valley, signing bonuses for the kinds of engineers that can develop new models can range up to $100 million, according to OpenAI CEO Sam Altman.
“I can’t see Apple doing that,” Martin said.
Earlier this week, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg sent a memo bragging about hiring 11 AI experts from companies such as OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google’s DeepMind. That came after Zuckerberg hired Scale AI CEO Alexandr Wang to lead a new AI division as part of a $14.3 billion deal.
Meta’s not the only company to spend hundreds of millions on AI celebrities to get them in the building. Google spent big to hire away the founders of Character.AI, Microsoft got its AI leader by striking a deal with Inflection and Amazon hired the executive team of Adept to bulk up its AI roster.
Apple, on the other hand, hasn’t announced any big AI hires in recent years. While Cook rubs shoulders with Pitt, the actual race may be passing Apple by.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk speaks alongside U.S. President Donald Trump to reporters in the Oval Office of the White House on May 30, 2025 in Washington, DC.
Kevin Dietsch | Getty Images
Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who bombarded President Donald Trump‘s signature spending bill for weeks, on Friday made his first comments since the legislation passed.
Musk backed a post on X by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who said the bill’s budget “explodes the deficit” and continues a pattern of “short-term politicking over long-term sustainability.”
The House of Representatives narrowly passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act on Thursday, sending it to Trump to sign into law.
Paul and Musk have been vocal opponents of Trump’s tax and spending bill, and repeatedly called out the potential for the spending package to increase the national debt.
On Monday, Musk called it the “DEBT SLAVERY bill.”
The independent Congressional Budget Office has said the bill could add $3.4 trillion to the $36.2 trillion of U.S. debt over the next decade. The White House has labeled the agency as “partisan” and continuously refuted the CBO’s estimates.
The bill includes trillions of dollars in tax cuts, increased spending for immigration enforcement and large cuts to funding for Medicaid and other programs.
It also cuts tax credits and support for solar and wind energy and electric vehicles, a particularly sore spot for Musk, who has several companies that benefit from the programs.
“I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!” Trump wrote in a social media post in early June as the pair traded insults and threats.
Shares of Tesla plummeted as the feud intensified, with the company losing $152 billion in market cap on June 5 and putting the company below $1 trillion in value. The stock has largely rebounded since, but is still below where it was trading before the ruckus with Trump.
Tesla one-month stock chart.
— CNBC’s Kevin Breuninger and Erin Doherty contributed to this article.
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella speaks at the Axel Springer building in Berlin on Oct. 17, 2023. He received the annual Axel Springer Award.
Ben Kriemann | Getty Images
Among the thousands of Microsoft employees who lost their jobs in the cutbacks announced this week were 830 staffers in the company’s home state of Washington.
Nearly a dozen game design workers in the state were part of the layoffs, along with three audio designers, two mechanical engineers, one optical engineer and one lab technician, according to a document Microsoft submitted to Washington employment officials.
There were also five individual contributors and one manager at the Microsoft Research division in the cuts, as well as 10 lawyers and six hardware engineers, the document shows.
Microsoft announced plans on Wednesday to eliminate 9,000 jobs, as part of an effort to eliminate redundancy and to encourage employees to focus on more meaningful work by adopting new technologies, a person familiar with the matter told CNBC. The person asked not to be named while discussing private matters.
Scores of Microsoft salespeople and video game developers have since come forward on social media to announce their departure. In April, Microsoft said revenue from Xbox content and services grew 8%, trailing overall growth of 13%.
In sales, the company parted ways with 16 customer success account management staff members based in Washington, 28 in sales strategy enablement and another five in sales compensation. One Washington-based government affairs worker was also laid off.
Microsoft eliminated 17 jobs in cloud solution architecture in the state, according to the document. The company’s fastest revenue growth comes from Azure and other cloud services that customers buy based on usage.
CEO Satya Nadella has not publicly commented on the layoffs, and Microsoft didn’t immediately provide a comment about the cuts in Washington. On a conference call with analysts in April, Microsoft CFO Amy Hood said the company had a “focus on cost efficiencies” during the March quarter.
WATCH: Microsoft layoffs not performance-based, largely targeting middle managers
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike