Thanks for watching! Do you think Microsoft should be allowed to close access to the Windows kernel to improve security? Let me know in the comments below.
How can EU dictate to the entire gloobe? It can't. As you mentioned, EU should get the vulnerable version of windows and sizzle in it itself while the rest of the world could enjoy a proper autonomous OS.
was the lack of gradual rollouts caused by the EU? was the lack of proper testing in the kernel driver EU's fault? did the EU force a ton of admins to install a closed-source kernel module? The reason why almost no admin installs crowdstrike on Linux (explaining why it wasn't on the news the crash on debian) is because having a tainted kernel (tainted being the official term) is a huge source of potential issues. Don't forget that Linux has around 90% of the server market. Also, there are more secure ways to protect a Linux server, such as running containers (cgroups which is the industry standard with socket) with apps behind selinux or tomoyo if you need syscall level enforcement.
Exactly my thought. They coded there update like morrons, made a huge mistake by forcing this update without proper testing, a friday (never do that) and they blame EU ??!!? I know some poeple are gona say this is not microsopft fault, it's CrowndStrike's fault and i partially agree. But why do they test the update without checking the channel used for it ?
@@nonofx31 CrowdStrike didn't blame the EU. That was Microsoft. I don't know whether CrowdStrike is commonly installed on Linux servers. But don't compare securing Linux with Windows. Windows is ubiquitous in the end-user computing space. And that means unlike a server, that it is exposed to interactive users with no education in computer security. Most security incidents on Windows stem from an action initially taken by an end user. Linux servers don't generally face that issue.
@@ThisWeekinIT i never talked about Linux, not once. This has nothing to do with Linux. Microsoft and CrowndStrike are both to blame for this, at different degree. Nobody else. And CS proposes a 10$ Uber eat card as compensation... WTF ! I like your channel by the way. I learn interesting stuff in your video.
Problem is, corporations don't care, least of all huge international companies. Nor do hegemonies, like the EU, give a shit about actual people. Problem with both is they are far to removed from the individual client, citizen. Windows should be split off from MSFT, to be a stand-alone business. That Windows business can then focus on Windows to make sure it is the best OS thus keeping users happy thus keeping money flowing.
This appears to relate to a deeper issue, where the current leadership in government & companies seem to have lost sight of empowering specific people to own the process of a particular function and refraining from interfering, while still holding said individuals responsible for outcomes. It is no wonder that we have the current clown show of net zero targets which are only possible in their imaginary world. Why don't we have engineers making engineering decisions? How can we expect Microsoft to have a stable system if a politician is allowed to force architectural decisions on MS? Prescribe outcomes and stop interfering with process. This always causes more problems. When and how did we start taking people's professional skills for granted, incredibly arrogant and disrespectful behaviour.
If you actually watch the video, you can see this is corrected 'on screen'. Sometimes mistakes happen when recording. This Week in IT is recorded by and large in one take. I don't have time for rerecording every part where I've fluffed my lines.
This is a very biased video. The EU didn't block Microsoft from making a security API for 3rd parties. It blocked Microsoft from making a security API for 3rd parties but allowing their own product (Defender) to bypass that API to get an unfair advantage. That's classic anti-competitive behaviour.
You sure apple not doing that? And as a user I frankly don't care. If I can get a more stable OS and a free antivirus out of box then I consider that a win win situation. 😅
The point is the EU needs to apply this rule across the board, not just tell Microsoft it can't do something but then allow Apple to do exactly that. Who is being anti competitive? Microsoft or the EU?
Extreme bullshit with the EU stuff. You blamed EU the most among CrowdStrike, Microsoft and the Sysadmins. Your logic that implementation of security API would have solved this is very flawed. This sensor product is designed to run low in the kernel and observe EVERYTHING. Most likely, CrowdStrike wouldn't migrate sensors to Microsoft API due to limitations and effort needed. Microsoft can't force the migration because Windows features are practically NEVER deprecated. So these companies would keep using kernel access. You are ultra biased towards Microsoft so your opinion about any incident regarding Microsoft is not trustworthy. I'm sorry but it is the truth.
I didn't blame anyone. I just asked where blame should be assigned and concluded that all parties might reconsider their positions. And I also pointed out that Microsoft and third-party security vendors might give customers the choice of running sensors in kernel or user space, allowing customers to choose whether they prefer deeper protection or greater resiliency against potential mishaps as we saw last week.
Thanks for watching! Do you think Microsoft should be allowed to close access to the Windows kernel to improve security? Let me know in the comments below.
Blocking access to the kernel you mean re-routing again the video driver? That would suck!!!
@@electrocat9 No, that's not what I mean. It's likely video drivers will always need to operate in kernel space for performance reasons.
Please performance before security. Windows is best for its speed.
How can EU dictate to the entire gloobe? It can't. As you mentioned, EU should get the vulnerable version of windows and sizzle in it itself while the rest of the world could enjoy a proper autonomous OS.
was the lack of gradual rollouts caused by the EU? was the lack of proper testing in the kernel driver EU's fault? did the EU force a ton of admins to install a closed-source kernel module?
The reason why almost no admin installs crowdstrike on Linux (explaining why it wasn't on the news the crash on debian) is because having a tainted kernel (tainted being the official term) is a huge source of potential issues. Don't forget that Linux has around 90% of the server market.
Also, there are more secure ways to protect a Linux server, such as running containers (cgroups which is the industry standard with socket) with apps behind selinux or tomoyo if you need syscall level enforcement.
Exactly my thought. They coded there update like morrons, made a huge mistake by forcing this update without proper testing, a friday (never do that) and they blame EU ??!!?
I know some poeple are gona say this is not microsopft fault, it's CrowndStrike's fault and i partially agree. But why do they test the update without checking the channel used for it ?
@@nonofx31 CrowdStrike didn't blame the EU. That was Microsoft. I don't know whether CrowdStrike is commonly installed on Linux servers. But don't compare securing Linux with Windows. Windows is ubiquitous in the end-user computing space. And that means unlike a server, that it is exposed to interactive users with no education in computer security. Most security incidents on Windows stem from an action initially taken by an end user. Linux servers don't generally face that issue.
@@ThisWeekinIT i never talked about Linux, not once. This has nothing to do with Linux. Microsoft and CrowndStrike are both to blame for this, at different degree. Nobody else. And CS proposes a 10$ Uber eat card as compensation... WTF !
I like your channel by the way. I learn interesting stuff in your video.
Problem is, corporations don't care, least of all huge international companies.
Nor do hegemonies, like the EU, give a shit about actual people.
Problem with both is they are far to removed from the individual client, citizen.
Windows should be split off from MSFT, to be a stand-alone business.
That Windows business can then focus on Windows to make sure it is the best OS thus keeping users happy thus keeping money flowing.
This appears to relate to a deeper issue, where the current leadership in government & companies seem to have lost sight of empowering specific people to own the process of a particular function and refraining from interfering, while still holding said individuals responsible for outcomes. It is no wonder that we have the current clown show of net zero targets which are only possible in their imaginary world. Why don't we have engineers making engineering decisions? How can we expect Microsoft to have a stable system if a politician is allowed to force architectural decisions on MS? Prescribe outcomes and stop interfering with process. This always causes more problems. When and how did we start taking people's professional skills for granted, incredibly arrogant and disrespectful behaviour.
Maybe politicians just need better advisors.
"Operating System is Essentially the core part of the OS" - did i hear that right?
If you actually watch the video, you can see this is corrected 'on screen'. Sometimes mistakes happen when recording. This Week in IT is recorded by and large in one take. I don't have time for rerecording every part where I've fluffed my lines.
This is a very biased video. The EU didn't block Microsoft from making a security API for 3rd parties. It blocked Microsoft from making a security API for 3rd parties but allowing their own product (Defender) to bypass that API to get an unfair advantage. That's classic anti-competitive behaviour.
You sure apple not doing that? And as a user I frankly don't care. If I can get a more stable OS and a free antivirus out of box then I consider that a win win situation. 😅
well then if others want to bypass that API, then they can just do that by making their own operating system no? fair game.
The point is the EU needs to apply this rule across the board, not just tell Microsoft it can't do something but then allow Apple to do exactly that. Who is being anti competitive? Microsoft or the EU?
micosoft is to blame for their shitty OS windows
Extreme bullshit with the EU stuff.
You blamed EU the most among CrowdStrike, Microsoft and the Sysadmins. Your logic that implementation of security API would have solved this is very flawed.
This sensor product is designed to run low in the kernel and observe EVERYTHING. Most likely, CrowdStrike wouldn't migrate sensors to Microsoft API due to limitations and effort needed.
Microsoft can't force the migration because Windows features are practically NEVER deprecated. So these companies would keep using kernel access.
You are ultra biased towards Microsoft so your opinion about any incident regarding Microsoft is not trustworthy.
I'm sorry but it is the truth.
I didn't blame anyone. I just asked where blame should be assigned and concluded that all parties might reconsider their positions. And I also pointed out that Microsoft and third-party security vendors might give customers the choice of running sensors in kernel or user space, allowing customers to choose whether they prefer deeper protection or greater resiliency against potential mishaps as we saw last week.