4 ms·

Why would Microsoft even bother making this comment? Is the outage in some part their fault? I was under the impression it had everything to do with the botched

Why would Microsoft even bother making this comment? Is the outage in some part their fault? I was under the impression it had everything to do with the botched croudstrike update, and nothing to do with Windows itself. This could have just as well happened with some widely deployed antivirus running in the Linux kernel.

dagmx 2y ago
The headline is clickbait. Microsoft is saying why they couldn’t secure the kernel against such an attack, and are right in saying that the EU prevents them from closing it off to third parties. They are not saying the EU is the root cause of the failure, just that they cannot close the hole currently due to the EU. What they leave out is that they could choose to integrate Defender into the OS for free, thereby removing it as a product to compete against. They could also move Defender to not require kernel hooks either. Neither are options they want to consider currently.
- zogrodea 2y ago
  Integrating Defender sounds like it would create an antitrust issue? If I remember correctly, MS was in the past taken to court and forced to sell some product or other separately, when they previously provided it for free. No comment about being able to move Defender to not require kernel hooks (I don't know).
  - dagmx 2y ago
    It’s unclear imho if it would be an antitrust behaviour. Many regions have security exceptions as long as it’s a core feature. It also wouldn’t prevent competitors working at a higher level either.
gumby 2y ago
> Why would Microsoft even bother making this comment? Is the outage in some part their fault? Two reasons: 1 - Few people understand anything about how their computer (/car/stove/phone/medicine/...) works -- they spend their time on other things. Without any model of how their device works its easy to misassign responsibility (see how many people think that Safari is Google or vice versa). So it's in MS's interest to try to get the message out. Of course people do this when they are at fault as well. 2 - EU is in a wave of beating up* on certain large companies. This can also be an opportunistic way to push back. * I am not implying whether I think the EU is correct or not.

dagmx 2y ago

The headline is clickbait. Microsoft is saying why they couldn’t secure the kernel against such an attack, and are right in saying that the EU prevents them from closing it off to third parties. They are not saying the EU is the root cause of the failure, just that they cannot close the hole currently due to the EU. What they leave out is that they could choose to integrate Defender into the OS for free, thereby removing it as a product to compete against. They could also move Defender to not require kernel hooks either. Neither are options they want to consider currently.

zogrodea 2y ago
Integrating Defender sounds like it would create an antitrust issue? If I remember correctly, MS was in the past taken to court and forced to sell some product or other separately, when they previously provided it for free. No comment about being able to move Defender to not require kernel hooks (I don't know).
- dagmx 2y ago
  It’s unclear imho if it would be an antitrust behaviour. Many regions have security exceptions as long as it’s a core feature. It also wouldn’t prevent competitors working at a higher level either.

gumby 2y ago

> Why would Microsoft even bother making this comment? Is the outage in some part their fault? Two reasons: 1 - Few people understand anything about how their computer (/car/stove/phone/medicine/...) works -- they spend their time on other things. Without any model of how their device works its easy to misassign responsibility (see how many people think that Safari is Google or vice versa). So it's in MS's interest to try to get the message out. Of course people do this when they are at fault as well. 2 - EU is in a wave of beating up* on certain large companies. This can also be an opportunistic way to push back. * I am not implying whether I think the EU is correct or not.