3 ms·
Harm for solarwinds is a lot more than the 24% decline in revenue. When we signed our cyberinsurance policy they made us attest that we had no solarwinds softw
by adrr 5y ago
Harm for solarwinds is a lot more than the 24% decline in revenue. When we signed our cyberinsurance policy they made us attest that we had no solarwinds software running in our network or on company assets.
- vsareto 5y agoThat's a bruh moment for sure. They going to do the same thing with log4j? I'm really curious what other restricted software/technology was in this policy.
- zdragnar 5y agoIf you were underwriting business insurance policies, wouldn't you insist that the policyholder did due diligence in terms of updating software with known vulnerabilities? Moreso, when a company has demonstrably bad security habits, would you want to insure their clients? It is a bit like home owners insurance companies that won't insure your house if you have a fireplace, or extend liability coverage if you have a particular breed of dog or exotic (and dangerous) pet.
- vsareto 5y agoRequire updates? Definitely. Blacklist an entire company's products? That's the weird part. Solarwinds had a pretty bad issue, but Microsoft has had plenty with Windows throughout Windows' lifetime (probably more than Solarwinds). Why is Windows not blacklisted? How about Apache? It seems like they added Solarwinds just because it hit the news.