Statement on the cyberattack by HBC deputy leader Glenn Haffenden published on the council website.

Cyberattack puts HBC website out of action for a day

Hastings Borough Council’s website was made unavailable last Wednesday due to a cyberattack launched by a pro-Russia hackers’ group. The website was later restored and the council says no personal data was stolen. The motive for the attack, which targeted other local authorities and UK organisations, appears to be a warning by prime minister Keir Starmer of an “accelerated” Russian threat to global security. Text Nick Terdre, research Russell Hall.

Hastings Borough Council’s website became unavailable on Wednesday 30 October for over a day in the face of a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack launched against it and other UK local authorities and bodies.

Cllr Glenn Haffenden

HBC deputy leader Glenn Haffenden said the council’s web team worked with its web provider to restore use, and no personal information was accessed. DDoS attacks work by flooding a website with requests and overwhelming its capacity to respond, thus causing it to crash.

Haffenden also told The Register, a UK technology news website, that: “The National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) has alerted us to this being a potential pro-Russia attack.” He added that this had not been confirmed, though it has now.

The NCSC, a government body which provides advice and support to the public and private sector on avoiding computer security threats, confirmed to The Register that it was supporting affected councils. “The NCSC has provided guidance to affected councils. Whilst DDoS attacks are relatively low in sophistication and impact, they can cause disruption by preventing legitimate users from accessing online services,” a spokesperson said.

“Organizations are encouraged to familiarize themselves with our actionable Denial of Service guidance to support the prevention and mitigation of such attacks.”

The source of the attacks has been confirmed as a pro-Russia hacker group called NoName057(16), which owned up to the actions, posting on X and Telegram that it was attacking a range of targets in the UK, naming multiple local authorities, along with 20 other companies and organisations whose websites have also been hit. Over the course of a week some 75 attacks have been made, including the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners.

The wave of actions was apparently triggered by a recent warning from prime minister Keir Starmer of an “accelerating” Russian threat to global security as attacks on Ukrainian port infrastructure in the Black Sea are stepped up, disrupting grain and oil shipments to Palestine and southern Africa under the World Food Programme, as well as cargoes to Egypt and other importers.

According to the government statement, “Defence Intelligence” has identified four named cargo ships – Paresa, Optima, Shui Spirit and Moon – which suffered collateral damage during strikes by Russian military forces, and in some cases may have been the intended target. Containers unloaded in Ukraine are assumed by Russian authorities to be carrying arms.

As context for the attacks, NoName057(16) said: “The Russian embassy in the UK has accused the British authorities of using the issue of grain corridor protection to conceal arms deliveries to the Ukrainian Armed Forces. According to the diplomatic ministry, the deliveries are carried out with the help of third-country dry cargo ships, which, in Russia’s opinion, is recognized by the British themselves.”

Maria Zakharova (photo: Ministry of Foreign Affairs).

After noting that “10 Downing Street has accused Russian forces of attacking Ukrainian Black Sea ports,” Maria Zakharova, director of the Information and Press Department in Russia’s Ministry Foreign Affairs, reiterated on X the same claim made by its UK embassy that, “We have noted that @10DowningStreet has accused Russian forces of attacking Ukrainian Black Sea ports.

“These accusations confirm that London is supplying weapons to the Kiev regime via the Black Sea corridor.”

The government statement does not mention this claim.

Also in: Local Government