3 ms·
By the way, Crowdstrike has shared "technical details", discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41013198 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41013
by Retr0id 2y ago
By the way, Crowdstrike has shared "technical details", discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41013198 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41013198
Unfortunately it's rather lacking in both technicality and detail.
- Havoc 2y agoCan’t say I’m surprised. Every major org will at least attempt to get compensation so playing entirely open cards is maybe not ideal
- Kudos 2y ago> We will update our findings in the root cause analysis as the investigation progresses. Give them a minute.
- devwastaken 2y agoNope. Tech is specially protected by both sides of the isle. Why do you think there's no real or legally defined "engineering" happening? No red tape. No filter of quality, no accountability. We have to legislate out big tech and start holding them accountable. Prison time for execs and significant fines is the correct and effective method.
- giantg2 2y agoAny org using a tech product should have a team reviewing contracts. Many contracts have financial penalties for not meeting SLAs. That's not going to be in the standard terms of service, but rather in an enterprise contract. Any large company just accepting standard ToS for business critical software is not doing their due diligence.
- mikkom 2y agoMost likely legal is highly involved in any postings about the incident
- giantg2 2y agoIt doesn't have to be that technical. What I'm reading in there is that they had a logic flaw and their test cases nd testing processes aren't robust enough to catch major logic flaws. Not that surprising the way most orgs treat their testing.