Ransomware Payments Dropped 29% In Q3 2024 According To Analysis

2

Ransomware payments dropped 29 percent in Q3 2024, based on a new analysis of victim transactions and attacker behavior. The decline points to stronger defenses and shifting negotiation dynamics.

Legal scrutiny, incident reporting, and sanctions risk also constrain decisions to pay. Insurers and negotiators are tightening standards, further reducing payment rates.

This report outlines the drivers behind the fall in ransomware payments, how organizations are adapting their incident playbooks, and what to expect next.

Ransomware Payments: What You Need to Know

• Ransomware payments fell 29 percent in Q3 2024 as backups, regulations, and negotiation policies improved.

Ransome Payments

A sustained drop in payments reflects reinforcing trends that limit attacker leverage. More enterprises maintain resilient, tested backups and immutable storage, which speeds restoration without paying.

Legal and regulatory exposure has increased, pushing organizations to report incidents and weigh sanctions and compliance risks tied to ransomware payments. Insurers and professional negotiators now apply stricter criteria, discouraging payment when viable recovery paths exist.

Public guidance continues to mature. The FBI’s ransomware advisories and the CISA StopRansomware initiative promote layered controls that reduce both likelihood and impact. Together, these measures suppress the volume and size of ransomware payments even as ransomware groups remain active.

What is driving the decline in ransomware payments?

Operational resilience has improved. Immutable backups, least privilege, and network segmentation constrain blast radius and accelerate recovery that avoids payments.

Regulatory scrutiny has grown, which raises the cost and risk of paying. Reporting requirements and sanctions compliance reviews factor into response decisions. Attacker overreach is also a driver. Repeated double and triple extortion has trained victims to question whether payment will prevent leaks or future attacks.

Market transparency supports tougher decisions. Reporting from firms such as Chainalysis and incident response consultancies gives victims realistic benchmarks. That intelligence improves negotiations and often eliminates the need for payments.

How organizations are changing their playbooks

Security teams are codifying response plans that deprioritize ransomware payments and focus on rapid containment and restoration. Updated playbooks emphasize credential hygiene, multifactor authentication, and EDR visibility, paired with tabletop exercises that test decision making.

Many organizations are investing in immutable backup tiers and offsite replicas that allow recovery without resorting to ransomware payments.

Zero trust principles and continuous exposure management limit lateral movement, which reduces attacker leverage. For background on common attack models, see what is Ransomware as a Service and this primer on ransomware defense basics.

Evidence from public and private reporting

Law enforcement advises against such payments and encourages incident reporting. The FBI IC3 highlights the value of working with authorities to identify perpetrators and prevent further harm.

Industry analysis from sources like Coveware details negotiation trends and shows how stronger backups and clear policies lower dependence on ransomware payments. As transparency improves, fewer victims default to paying.

Practical steps to reduce the chance of paying

Organizations that prepare thoroughly are least likely to authorize ransomware payments. Test the following controls quarterly and verify outcomes through drills:

• Backups: Maintain immutable, offline, and frequently tested backups. Practice full and partial restores to avoid ransomware payments under pressure.
• Identity security: Enforce MFA, least privilege, and rapid revocation for compromised identities.
• Endpoint vigilance: Deploy EDR with round the clock monitoring, strong isolation, and scripted remediation.
• Network segmentation: Limit lateral movement and contain impacts before ransomware payments become a consideration.
• Incident readiness: Establish legal, compliance, and executive protocols that document alternatives to ransomware payments.

For a tactical checklist, see this guide to six practical steps to defend against ransomware.

Implications: Progress and remaining risks

Advantages: Fewer ransomware payments indicate meaningful progress. Mature backup strategies, stronger identity controls, and tabletop-tested decision trees are reducing attacker leverage.

Insurers and legal teams are aligning on policies that discourage ransomware payments unless recovery options are exhausted. Lower criminal revenue can erode the scale and consistency of some ransomware operations.

Disadvantages: Threat actors will adapt. Some may escalate destructive actions, expand data theft, or time intrusions to maximize business disruption.

Even as ransomware payments decrease, victims still face downtime, reputational damage, and regulatory exposure. Continued investment, continuous testing, and cross functional coordination are required to prevent the rebound of ransomware payments.

Conclusion

The 29 percent decline in Q3 2024 ransomware payments is encouraging, yet the pressure from ransomware groups persists. Affiliates and initial access brokers will adjust tactics quickly.

Organizations that enforce MFA, maintain immutable backups, and rehearse incident response can restore operations faster and avoid ransomware payments. Public resources from CISA and the FBI help teams mature controls and refine decision frameworks.

Keep improving exposure management, identity security, and recovery testing. With layered defenses and clear policies, ransomware payments become the exception rather than the expected outcome. For password resilience, review how AI can crack weak passwords and strengthen passphrase strategies.

Questions Worth Answering

Does a drop in ransomware payments mean attacks are decreasing?

No. It usually reflects better recovery options and stricter legal and policy constraints on paying.

Should organizations ever consider ransomware payments?

Law enforcement discourages payment. Decisions should involve legal, compliance, and risk teams, with priority on restoration and reporting.

What controls most reduce the chance of paying?

Immutable backups, MFA and least privilege, EDR with rapid isolation, and effective segmentation lower attacker leverage.

How do double and triple extortion tactics affect decisions?

They add pressure but also skepticism, since some groups leak data anyway. Strong playbooks reduce reliance on paying.

What role do insurers play in ransomware payments?

Insurers influence preparation and negotiation scope. Many policies require specific controls and restrict payment in certain cases.

Where can teams find trustworthy ransomware guidance?

Review CISA StopRansomware, the FBI IC3 ransomware page, and reputable incident response advisories.

How can we prepare executives for a ransomware event?

Run cross-functional tabletop exercises, define decision thresholds, and pre-approve actions that avoid unnecessary ransomware payments.