undefined | Better HN

0 pointsjmuguy1y ago0 comments

I've had trouble nailing down if thats the case from searching around online. And if thats true - thats absolutely on Crowdstrike. And that behavior should disqualify it from being used on critical systems. I imagine this incident will cause a lot of teams to consider just what can happen automatically on their systems.

0 comments

wisemang1y ago

It’s definitely the case. See Crowdstrike’s preliminary post incident review here: https://www.crowdstrike.com/falcon-content-update-remediatio...

The nature of “content updates” vs a full product update. Though you may be right, perhaps they provide controls for those updates, I’ve never used their software. But doesn’t sound like it.

CydeWeys1y ago

It's on CrowdStrike, but it's also on IT for even allowing installation of critical software like this that has a bypass at all. Updates shouldn't even be allowed to bypass IT's safe rollout procedures, at least not without IT signing off on it anyway.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsjmuguy1y ago0 comments

0 comments

wisemang1y ago

It’s definitely the case. See Crowdstrike’s preliminary post incident review here: https://www.crowdstrike.com/falcon-content-update-remediatio...

The nature of “content updates” vs a full product update. Though you may be right, perhaps they provide controls for those updates, I’ve never used their software. But doesn’t sound like it.

CydeWeys1y ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse