But I’ve read so many posts on here about how Linux is flawless!
Are you shocked that bad software can crash multiple operating systems or something?
I’m not shocked at all, but there seems to be a very sizable number of people on Lemmy who think if people just used Linux there’d never be another problem or exploit again, which is ridiculous. Mac users used to feel the same way until the market share started to grow and all of the sudden you’re seeing news of serious exploits.
Nah, but there were some Linux evangelists claiming this couldn’t possibly happen to Linux and it only happened to Windows because Windows is bad. And it was your own fault for getting this BSOD if you’re still running Windows.
And sure, Windows bad and all, but this one wasn’t really Microsofts fault.
The sane ones of us know well that a faulty driver is a faulty driver, but! Linux culture is different. Which is why this happened so spectacularly with Windows. EDIT: and not with Linux
I’ve had the proprietary Nvidia driver crash my whole system a few times. Hoping their new open-source driver (not nouveau, I mean the new out-of-tree open-source one) is better.
Well, ever heard freeBSD?
Yeah, it supports kernel modules, so is also vulnerable to bad third party kernel code.
🤔if nobody makes a third party kernel module, then there is still no risk
Also, even if they do, you can choose to not load it.
It amused me that so many people had this installed, but had no idea what it was for.
if they dont know the boot sequence is a thing maybe their opinion on this doesnt really matter 🤷🏼
not sure if you’re being sarcastic, but if anything this news paints linux deployment in an even better light.
This is good for Bitcoin
To avoid such issues in the future, CrowdStrike should prioritize rigorous testing across all supported configurations.
Bold of them to assume there’s a future after a gazillion off incoming lawsuits.
I was listening to a podcast earlier, and they mentioned the fact that their legal liability may, in fact, be limited because of specific wording in most of their contracts.
In other words, they may actually get away with this in the short term. In the long-term, however, a lot of organizations and governments that were hit by this will be reevaluating their reliance on such monolithic tech solutions as crowdstrike, and even Microsoft.
So you may be right, but not for the reasons you think.
and even Microsoft
(x) doubt
They had decades to consider Microsoft a liability. Why start doing something about it now?
Literally lol’d. Thanks for that!
Because cybersecurity is becoming more of a priority. The US government has really put their attention on it in the last few years.
Hard to tell, sometimes.
I was in IT back in 2001 when the Code Red virus hit. It was a very similar situation where entire enterprises in totally unrelated fields were brought down. So many infected machines were still trying to replicate that corporate networks and Internet backbone routers were getting absolutely crushed.
Prior to that, trying to get real funding for securing networks was almost impossible. Suddenly security was the hottest topic in IT and corporations were throwing money at all the snake oil Silicon Valley could produce.
That lasted for a couple years, then things started going back to business as usual. Microsoft in particular was making all sorts of promises and boasts about how they made security their top priority, but that never really happened. Security remained something slapped on at the end of product development and was never allowed to interfere with producing products demanded by marketing with inherently insecure designs.
You’re absolutely right. Everyone will be very worried and talk about the importance of security in the enterprise and yada yada yada until a cool new AI spreadsheet software comes out and everybody forgets to even check if their firewall is turned on.
But with that being said, if you have been looking for a good time to ask for cybersecuity funding at your org, see if you can’t lock down 5 years worth of budget while everyone is aware of the risk to their businesses.
Contracts aren’t set in stone. Not only are those contracts modified before they are accepted by both parties, it’s difficult to limit liability when negligence is involved. CS is at worst going to be defending against those, at best defending against people dumping them ahead of schedule against their contracted term length.
So in the end, they is an internal contradiction in capitalism. It just append to be collapse due to lack of ressources and dumb management
It just append to be collapse due to lack of ressources and dumb management
TIL reverting the direction of Siberian rivers and turning Kazakh steppe into agricultural land were capitalist projects.
This one is a contradiction of highly hierarchical and degenerate systems.
With capitalism the contradiction is old and well known - power bends rules. Bent rules cause degeneracy. Degeneracy causes degradation and collapse.
Got me interested enough to Google, maybe you should too
Research and planning work on the project started in the 1930s and was carried out on a large scale in the 1960s through the early 1980s. The controversial project was abandoned in 1986, primarily for environmental reasons, without much actual construction work ever done.
If you mean the rivers part, then yes.
If you mean the steppe part, then no, they’ve caused a few ecological catastrophes first before stopping.
I feel like no matter what’s happening, some people will always blame capitalism
What does an economic system have to do with bad IT decisions?
- Short term interest: Yearly benefits make the corporation value. Work to enhance stability, such as investment in other open source project, documentation, formation, or code quality enhancement are less likely to qet time
- Commercial focus: In a capitalist economy, we don’t have pure and perfect knowledge of product. Even if it’s supposed to work like this, commercials and adds are way more effective to sell products, than a top notch product
- Antagonist interests: even if workers tend to like making good stuff, they’d rather eat and get housed. Sending a warning because the products are bad or dangerous can threat someone that made a bad decision, which is likely to be someone in charge. Keeping a low profile is (unfortunately) a reasonable behavior
I think that an economy lead by financial interest, open market, and a hierarchy in the production is a good definition of capitalism.
And yes, definitely the way that people get food, housing, and not being exclude will define a lot of thing in society.
- Short term interest: this is just human nature. All economic models work around human nature and desires. People desire short-term gains in pretty much any endeavor. If this was a communist society, they’d still rush to get this thing out as fast as possible so they could meet state quotas/meet whatever other incentive is being offered to finish the job. The problem comes not from the motivations, but how they respond to it. Rushing deadlines and ignoring the need for testing and quality code is a universal human constant.
- Commercial focus: we have a much better idea of how much an endeavor, product, service, etc. will cost under capitalism because we have a decentralized and automatic way to calculate its value in the form of prices. Miscalculations - or simple human errors, like pushing bad code by accident - happen though, and hopefully this company has learned that prioritizing pushing something out can risk losing them money vs. testing it and coming out with a quality product.
- Antagonist interests: this is another question of short-term vs. long-term interests. Say you have a factory. If you crank up the machines to double speed, you’re potentially doubling your production, right? It isn’t that simple, actually. You can end up with a lot more workplace accidents that way, which will destroy your productivity extremely quickly. Same deal here. This will, hopefully, be a lesson learned by the industry in not pushing garbage code. M$ can’t serve ads to people who can’t boot their PCs, and will instead lose boatloads of money suddenly having to fulfill tech support contracts because of their screw-up, for example. Crowdstrike is going to have its competitors look a lot more appealing from here on out because they’ve been exposed as fools. (If they have no competitors - IT people, this is your sign!) Mistakes will happen until the end of time, of course, but that doesn’t mean fat-fingering the keyboard is a fault of the Western economic system.
Capitalism is, in essence, the ability for people to exchange their goods freely. It isn’t dependent on corporations or some weird hierarchy of managers and workers. Those are facts of living in this system, but it isn’t a direct consequence of “capitalism.” If everyone worked only for themselves and produced something to bring to the exchange, that would still be capitalism.
Because Linux sysadmins know to test a fucking update before applying to the whole company
Companies don’t really use Debian or Rocky in widescale production because they have no support.
Now red hat or ubuntu is a different matter.
Honestly though this does point out that this is a pattern of behavior on crowdstrikes part. This should have been the canary in the coalmine.
We actually use rocky and I think Debian at work for servers. We are currently migrating away from EOL centos .
We use Alma, which is basically Rocky. Before that, CentOS. Lots of people don’t need or want the expensive support contracts.
OSS support though donations and commits is the way to go unless you get value out of those contracts (we would not).
A lot of companies use debian
Microsoft already has a very bad reputation, so they will be blamed for every issue on their OS.
Vista suffered from bad 3rd party drivers, then people proceeded to just dunk on M$ due to their already bad name. Despite Edge is nowadays just a different flavor of Chromium, people are still making “haha IE slow” memes, even those that still claim Google being the “savior of the internet”.
I recently learned that this is the same company that gave us the bs Russia Gate.
I recently learned that this is the same company that gave us the bs Russia Gate.
WTF you mean the US Senate?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/aug/18/donald-trump-us-senate-report-russia-campaign
So who do you think hacked the DNC and got their emails, then? Is it the same people who hacked the RNC but didn’t leak the emails? What makes you more qualified than CrowdStrike on this?
U.S. intelligence officials cannot make definitive conclusions about the hacking of the Democratic National Committee computer servers because they did not analyze those servers themselves. Instead, they relied on the forensics of CrowdStrike, a private contractor for the DNC that was not a neutral party, much as “Russian dossier” compiler Christopher Steele, also a DNC contractor, was not a neutral party. This puts two Democrat-hired contractors squarely behind underlying allegations in the affair – a key circumstance that Mueller ignores.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/aug/18/donald-trump-us-senate-report-russia-campaign
A report by the Senate intelligence committee… runs to nearly 1,000 pages and goes further than last year’s investigation into Russian election interference by special prosecutor Robert Mueller… identifies Konstantin Kilimnik as a Russian intelligence officer employed by the GRU, the military intelligence agency behind the 2018 poisoning of the Russian double agent Sergei Skripal. It cites evidence – some of it redacted – linking Kilimnik to the GRU’s hacking and dumping of Democratic party emails.
So no evidence it wasn’t Russia? No alternative? Ok.
