Okay, so just a sec, yes, the crowdstrike thing was a BIG fucking deal… But what is wild to me is how it’s seemingly being unmentioned that the world crashed bc… Windows crashed… So maybe it’s a wake up call that ONE fucking OS shouldn’t be the GLOBAL standard. I dunno tho.
It wasn’t the whole world. Our business went on just fine without any issues and we were running Windows too. And the thing about that is you have a lot of people pushing for a homogeneous culture on Linux, not realizing that 1) crowdstrike was crashing Linux systems a couple months ago and 2) if it were to become the dominant system we could see things happen that way too.
Running windows with crowdstrike? Or just running windows in general? Kind of a big distinction since we are talking about a kernel level flaw. Also one personal experience doesn’t invalidate how wide spread the issue was.
People are definitely talking about that. Maybe not in the media but in the affected industries.
It was different when we weren’t living in a software as a service world. You could be mono platform but since you had complete control you didn’t have to worry you could roll out how you wanted.
Crowd strike by it’s very nature is supposed to be live updated throughout the day as threats emerge.
If we want services like these maybe we need to come up with better ways to isolate them from the kernel while still allowing crowdstrike type software to detect threats
Solving the crowdstrike problem could solve kernel level anti cheat software too
You’re talking about the IDS/IPS problem. For it not to impact the kernel it would need to be a passive, read only system. But if you need it to be active to actively prevent threats it needs to have the same level of access a threat actor could gain. You can’t move everything to user space without a shit load of signing and things like TPM and SecureBoot which people have been decrying for years as “vendor lock in”. So at some point a level of trust or risk must be accepted.
Windows blames the EU for forcing them to allow other vendors with access to do this type of thing rather than just letting Microsoft themselves manage it.
I’m not sure I buy that argument but it’s going to get a bit tricky.
I dislike windows and I pretty much agree with your point, but this was crowdstrike through and through, wasn’t it? They’re there ones selling a product that requires privileged access, they’re the ones who need to be responsible with that privilege. Microsoft made the OS, but they didn’t do the breaking here.
Okay, so just a sec, yes, the crowdstrike thing was a BIG fucking deal… But what is wild to me is how it’s seemingly being unmentioned that the world crashed bc… Windows crashed… So maybe it’s a wake up call that ONE fucking OS shouldn’t be the GLOBAL standard. I dunno tho.
It wasn’t the whole world. Our business went on just fine without any issues and we were running Windows too. And the thing about that is you have a lot of people pushing for a homogeneous culture on Linux, not realizing that 1) crowdstrike was crashing Linux systems a couple months ago and 2) if it were to become the dominant system we could see things happen that way too.
So I’m kinda curious, what would you suggest?
I haven’t had time to come up with a solution my dude. I don’t. Even have a suggestion. I’m just putting it out there.
Running windows with crowdstrike? Or just running windows in general? Kind of a big distinction since we are talking about a kernel level flaw. Also one personal experience doesn’t invalidate how wide spread the issue was.
People are definitely talking about that. Maybe not in the media but in the affected industries.
It was different when we weren’t living in a software as a service world. You could be mono platform but since you had complete control you didn’t have to worry you could roll out how you wanted.
Crowd strike by it’s very nature is supposed to be live updated throughout the day as threats emerge.
If we want services like these maybe we need to come up with better ways to isolate them from the kernel while still allowing crowdstrike type software to detect threats
Solving the crowdstrike problem could solve kernel level anti cheat software too
You’re talking about the IDS/IPS problem. For it not to impact the kernel it would need to be a passive, read only system. But if you need it to be active to actively prevent threats it needs to have the same level of access a threat actor could gain. You can’t move everything to user space without a shit load of signing and things like TPM and SecureBoot which people have been decrying for years as “vendor lock in”. So at some point a level of trust or risk must be accepted.
Windows blames the EU for forcing them to allow other vendors with access to do this type of thing rather than just letting Microsoft themselves manage it.
I’m not sure I buy that argument but it’s going to get a bit tricky.
It’s a bs argument meant to shift blame. I mean does Microsoft really think a major company would leave security up to Windows fucking Defender?
I dislike windows and I pretty much agree with your point, but this was crowdstrike through and through, wasn’t it? They’re there ones selling a product that requires privileged access, they’re the ones who need to be responsible with that privilege. Microsoft made the OS, but they didn’t do the breaking here.
I simultaneously hear from people that the Internet runs on Linux and also everything in the world runs on windows
Servers vs desktops.