> It's clear to me that CrowdStrike saw this as a data update vs. a code update, and that they had much more stringent QA procedures for code updates that they

> It's clear to me that CrowdStrike saw this as a data update vs. a code update, and that they had much more stringent QA procedures for code updates that they did data updates. It cannot have been a surprise to Crowdstrike that pushing bad data had the potential to bork the target computer. So if they had such an attitude that would indicate striking incompetence. So perhaps you are right.