…according to a Twitter post by the Chief Informational Security Officer of Grand Canyon Education.

So, does anyone else find it odd that the file that caused everything CrowdStrike to freak out, C-00000291-
00000000-00000032.sys was 42KB of blank/null values, while the replacement file C-00000291-00000000-
00000.033.sys was 35KB and looked like a normal, if not obfuscated sys/.conf file?

Also, apparently CrowdStrike had at least 5 hours to work on the problem between the time it was discovered and the time it was fixed.

  • tiramichu@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    If I send you on stage at the Olympic Games opening ceremony with a sealed envelope

    And I say “This contains your script, just open it and read it”

    And then when you open it, the script is blank

    You’re gonna freak out

    • digdilem@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Nice analogy, except you’d check the script before you tried to use it. Computers are really good at crc/hash checking files to verify their integrity, and that’s exactly what a privileged process like antivirus should do with every source of information.

    • Gork@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Ah, makes sense. I guess a driver would completely freak out if that file gave no instructions and was just like “…”

    • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Maybe. But I’d like to think I’d just say something clever like, “says here that this year the pummel horse will be replaced by yours truly!”

      • Takios@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Problem is that software cannot deal with unexpected situations like a human brain can. Computers do exactly what a programmer tells it to do, nothing more nothing less. So if a situation arises that the programmer hasn’t written code for, then there will be a crash.

        • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Poorly written code can’t.

          In this case:

          1. Load config data
          2. If data is valid:
            1. Use config data
          3. If data is invalid:
            1. Crash entire OS

          Is just poor code.

          • Takios@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            I agree that the code is probably poor but I doubt it was a conscious decision to crash the OS.

            The code is probably just:

            1. Load config data
            2. Do something with data

            And 2 fails unexpectedly because the data is garbage and wasn’t checked if it’s valid.

              • Gadg8eer@preserve.games
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                Unfortunately, an OS that covers such cases is a lost monetization opportunity, fuck the system, use a Linux distro, you get the idea. Microsoft makes money off of tech support for people too unversed in computers to fix it themselves.

            • Morphit @feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              You can still catch the error at runtime and do something appropriate. That might be to say this update might have been tampered with and refuse to boot, but more likely it’d be to just send an error report back to the developers that an unexpected condition is being hit and just continuing without loading that one faulty definition file.

          • 5C5C5C@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            When talking about the driver level, you can’t always just proceed to the next thing when an error happens.

            Imagine if you went in for open heart surgery but the doctor forgot to put in the new valve while he was in there. He can’t just stitch you up and tell you to get on with it, you’ll be bleeding away inside.

            In this specific case we’re talking about security for business devices and critical infrastructure. If a security driver is compromised, in a lot of cases it may legitimately be better for the computer to not run at all, because a security compromise could mean it’s open season for hackers on your sensitive device. We’ve seen hospitals held random, we’ve seen customer data swiped from major businesses. A day of downtime is arguably better than those outcomes.

            The real answer here is crowdstrike needs a more reliable CI/CD pipeline. A failure of this magnitude is inexcusable and represents a major systemic failure in their development process. But the OS crashing as a result of that systemic failure may actually be the most reasonable desirable outcome compared to any other possible outcome.

            • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              That’s a bad analogy. CrowdStrike’s driver encountering an error isn’t the same as not having disk IO or a memory corruption. If CrowdStrike’s driver didn’t load at all wasn’t installed the system could still boot.

              It should absolutely be expected that if the CrowdStrike driver itself encounters an error, there should be a process that allows the system to gracefully recover. The issue is that CrowdStrike likely thought of their code as not being able to crash as they likely only ever tested with good configs, and thus never considered a graceful failure of their driver.

            • Morphit @feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              This error isn’t intentionally crashing because of a security risk, though that could happen. It’s a null pointer exception, so there are no static or runtime checks that could have prevented or handled this more gracefully. This was presumably a bug in the driver for a long time, then a faulty config file came and triggered the crashes. Better static analysis and testing of the kernel driver is one aspect, how these live config updates are deployed and monitored is another.

            • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              But the OS crashing as a result of that systemic failure may actually be the most reasonable desirable outcome compared to any other possible outcome.

              In which case this should’ve been documented behaviour and probably configurable.

            • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              You know there’s a whole other scenario where the system can simply boot the last known good config.

                • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  The following:

                  • An internal backup of previous configs
                  • Encrypted copies
                  • Massive warnings in the system that current loaded config has failed integrity check

                  There’s a load of other checks that could be employed. This is literally no different than securing the OS itself.

                  This is essentially a solved problem, but even then it’s impossible to make any system 100% secure. As the person you replied to said: “this is poor code”

                  Edit: just to add, failure for the system to boot should NEVER be the desired outcome. Especially when the party implementing that is a 3rd party service. The people who setup these servers are expecting them to operate for things to work. Nothing is gained from a non-booting critical system and literally EVERYTHING to lose. If it’s critical then it must be operational.

                  • The 3rd party service is AV. You do not want to boot a potentially compromised or insecure system that is unable to start its AV properly, and have it potentially access other critical systems. That’s a recipe for a perhaps more local but also more painful disaster. It makes sense that a critical enterprise system does not boot if something is off. No AV means the system is a security risk and should not boot and connect to other critical/sensitive systems, period.

                    These sorts of errors should be alleviated through backup systems and prevented by not auto-updating these sorts of systems.

                    Sure, for a personal PC I would not necessarily want a BSOD, I’d prefer if it just booted and alerted the user. But for enterprise servers? Best not.

      • Hazzia@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m gonna take from this that we should have AI doing disaster recovery on all deployments. Tech CEO’s have been hyping AI up so much, what could possibly go wrong?

        • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          What are the chances that Crowdstrike started using ai to do their update deployments, and they just won’t admit it?

    • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      The funny bit is, I’m sure more than a few people at Crowdstrike are preparing 3 envelopes right now.

    • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Except “freak out” could have various manifestations.

      In this case it was “burn down the venue”.

      It should have been “I’m sorry, there’s been an issue, let’s move on to the next speaker”

      • tiramichu@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        You’re right of course and that should be on Microsoft to better implement their driver loading. But yes.

        • Morphit @feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          The driver is in kernel mode. If it crashes, the kernel has no idea if any internal structures have been left in an inconsistent state. If it doesn’t halt then it has the potential to cause all sorts of damage.

      • Strykker@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Except since it was an antivirus software the system is basically told “I must be running for you to finish booting”, which does make sense as it means the antivirus can watch the system before any malicious code can get it’s hooks into things.

        • Morphit @feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I don’t think the kernel could continue like that. The driver runs in kernel mode and took a null pointer exception. The kernel can’t know how badly it’s been screwed by that, the only feasible option is to BSOD.

          The driver itself is where the error handling should take place. First off it ought to have static checks to prove it can’t have trivial memory errors like this. Secondly, if a configuration file fails to load, it should make a determination about whether it’s safe to continue or halt the system to prevent a potential exploit. You know, instead of shitting its pants and letting Windows handle it.

    • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Ah yes. So Windows is the screaming in terror version and other systems are the “oh, sorry everyone, looks like there’s an error. Let’s just move on to the next bit” version.