Good question. Its difficult to answer because without EDR solutions, I think there would probably be more motivation to make it such that the compromise of a s

Good question. Its difficult to answer because without EDR solutions, I think there would probably be more motivation to make it such that the compromise of a single endpoint couldn't ransomware your whole company. Aka real "zero trust" architecture rather than the buzzword. But I've heard the other side of the story from sysadmins that say this is wishful thinking and that it would take enormous amounts of effort to achieve that. I think if you are a small company or a new company with a disproportionate amount of technically skilled employees and without a lot of legacy active directory and shared drive stuff going on, it's probably a net positive not to have an EDR and to properly secure everything instead. That isn't most companies though. So I guess my answer to your question is "I don't know" and sysadmins seem to be in major disagreement about this, with Windows focused admins tending to be more favorable to EDR (for easily explainable reasons) and Linux folks being especially opposed. Given Linux admins tend to have less interaction with the lowest common denominator end user, I'm actually tending towards believing the Windows admins have a point that a lot of us on HackerNews maybe don't have the experience to understand. I realize your question was about Crowdstrike in particular, but I think it's a question that might apply to EDR software in general.