On 23/07/2024 01:36, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 10:11:22 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 21/07/2024 22:48, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> Feel free to let us know what kind of “guarantees” CrowdStrike were
>>> offering their customers. And whether they were worth the paper they
>>> were written on.
>>
>> I have no idea, bit if they weren't offering any, why would anyone buy
>> their service, and why would their share price collapse 30% this week?
>
> Because Dindows users. Because the sharemarket doesn’t have much long-term
> memory.
>
>> There is at least one on their web site
>
> And here I thought you said you had “no idea”.

I didn't. Then I looked sweety.

--
A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on
its shoes.

On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 01:40:34 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 23/07/2024 01:36, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> And here I thought you said you had “no idea”.
>
> I didn't. Then I looked sweety.

Open your mouth first, then inform yourself second. Typical.

You didn’t look enough. Try here
<https://www.crowdstrike.com/terms-conditions/>.

On 2024-07-22 17:31, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 13:37:00 -0700, Mark Shroyer wrote:
>
>> So I agree that manual updates would have prevented this.
>
> Note that specifying manual updates only stops the main part of the
> software from updating itself. The bug was in a rules file, and these get
> updated automatically regardless.

Thanks, I didn't know this.

On 23/07/2024 03:07, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 01:40:34 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 23/07/2024 01:36, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> And here I thought you said you had “no idea”.
>>
>> I didn't. Then I looked sweety.
>
> Open your mouth first, then inform yourself second. Typical.
>
> You didn’t look enough. Try here
> <https://www.crowdstrike.com/terms-conditions/>.

Its a service agreement and a legal agreement.
If crowdstrike doesn't pay out, all crowdstrike customers will leave.

Its that simple.

--
The higher up the mountainside
The greener grows the grass.
The higher up the monkey climbs
The more he shows his arse.

Traditional

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> You may recall the Government and big businesses supported X networking
>> propcols. X400. X 25.
>
> No, I don’t recall any Government “supporting” those.

25 years ago the NHS used X.400 based email addresses

On 23/07/2024 11:52, Andy Burns wrote:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> You may recall the Government and big businesses supported X networking
>>> propcols. X400. X 25.
>>
>> No, I don’t recall any Government “supporting” those.
>
> 25 years ago the NHS used X.400 based email addresses

"By 1984, the international reference model OSI model, which was not
compatible with TCP/IP, had been agreed upon. Many European governments
(particularly France, West Germany and the UK) and the United States
Department of Commerce mandated compliance with the OSI model, while the
US Department of Defense planned to transition from TCP/IP to OSI. "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_Wars

Once again Lawrence is simply wrong.

--
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the
other is to refuse to believe what is true.”

—Soren Kierkegaard

On Tue, 23 Jul 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 23/07/2024 11:52, Andy Burns wrote:
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> You may recall the Government and big businesses supported X networking
>>>> propcols. X400. X 25.
>>>
>>> No, I don’t recall any Government “supporting” those.
>>
>> 25 years ago the NHS used X.400 based email addresses
>
> "By 1984, the international reference model OSI model, which was not
> compatible with TCP/IP, had been agreed upon. Many European governments
> (particularly France, West Germany and the UK) and the United States
> Department of Commerce mandated compliance with the OSI model, while the US
> Department of Defense planned to transition from TCP/IP to OSI. "
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_Wars
>
> Once again Lawrence is simply wrong.

Yawn, that's getting tedious. Maybe we should make that the default, and
exlaim when he is right instead? That would be much more interesting. ;)

D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
> [-- text/plain, encoding 8bit, charset: UTF-8, 28 lines --]
>
>
>
> On Tue, 23 Jul 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 23/07/2024 11:52, Andy Burns wrote:
>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You may recall the Government and big businesses supported X networking
>>>>> propcols. X400. X 25.
>>>>
>>>> No, I don’t recall any Government “supporting” those.
>>>
>>> 25 years ago the NHS used X.400 based email addresses
>>
>> "By 1984, the international reference model OSI model, which was not
>> compatible with TCP/IP, had been agreed upon. Many European governments
>> (particularly France, West Germany and the UK) and the United States
>> Department of Commerce mandated compliance with the OSI model, while the US
>> Department of Defense planned to transition from TCP/IP to OSI. "
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_Wars
>>
>> Once again Lawrence is simply wrong.
>
> Yawn, that's getting tedious. Maybe we should make that the default, and
> exlaim when he is right instead? That would be much more interesting. ;)

Doing so would reduce the noise, as he is so seldom right.

Better would be for everyone to killfile him, and never respond to his
ravings. Eventually he would starve and go away if he stopped getting
fed.

On Tue, 23 Jul 2024, Rich wrote:

> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>> [-- text/plain, encoding 8bit, charset: UTF-8, 28 lines --]
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 23 Jul 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 23/07/2024 11:52, Andy Burns wrote:
>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> You may recall the Government and big businesses supported X networking
>>>>>> propcols. X400. X 25.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, I don’t recall any Government “supporting” those.
>>>>
>>>> 25 years ago the NHS used X.400 based email addresses
>>>
>>> "By 1984, the international reference model OSI model, which was not
>>> compatible with TCP/IP, had been agreed upon. Many European governments
>>> (particularly France, West Germany and the UK) and the United States
>>> Department of Commerce mandated compliance with the OSI model, while the US
>>> Department of Defense planned to transition from TCP/IP to OSI. "
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_Wars
>>>
>>> Once again Lawrence is simply wrong.
>>
>> Yawn, that's getting tedious. Maybe we should make that the default, and
>> exlaim when he is right instead? That would be much more interesting. ;)
>
> Doing so would reduce the noise, as he is so seldom right.
>
> Better would be for everyone to killfile him, and never respond to his
> ravings. Eventually he would starve and go away if he stopped getting
> fed.
>

You Sir, are a wise, wise man! I have killfiled him and I am waiting for
the day of the starving. ;)

On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 08:40:28 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> If crowdstrike doesn't pay out, all crowdstrike customers will leave.

Which is quite a back down from “legal guarantees”, isn’t it?

So customers who go bankrupt will in future take their business elsewhere.
Take that, CrowdStrike!

On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 12:38:04 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>"By 1984, the international reference model OSI model, which was not
>compatible with TCP/IP, had been agreed upon. Many European governments
>(particularly France, West Germany and the UK) and the United States
>Department of Commerce mandated compliance with the OSI model, while the
>US Department of Defense planned to transition from TCP/IP to OSI. "
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_Wars
>
>Once again Lawrence is simply wrong.

In 1988 I went to a Uninet (South African Universities Network)
conference and they were discussing OSI migration.

My contribution was to persuade them to link up with the Fidonet BBS
network to connect to the Internet, which they did, and for the next
two years ALL South Africa's Internet traffic passed over a 9600 bps
dial-up line between Grahamstown in South Africa and a BBS in Oregon
USA.

Things were complicated because JANet in the UK used domain-name
addressing different from other places -- @uk.ox.ac and so on.

--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

On 24/07/2024 03:52, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 08:40:28 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> If crowdstrike doesn't pay out, all crowdstrike customers will leave.
>
> Which is quite a back down from “legal guarantees”, isn’t it?
>
No
*plonk*

> So customers who go bankrupt will in future take their business elsewhere.
> Take that, CrowdStrike!

--
"Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace,
community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
"What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

"Jeremy Corbyn?"

On Wed, 24 Jul 2024 07:36:16 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 24/07/2024 03:52, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 23 Jul 2024 08:40:28 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> If crowdstrike doesn't pay out, all crowdstrike customers will leave.
>>
>> Which is quite a back down from “legal guarantees”, isn’t it?
>>
> [throws a petulant tanty]

Oh dear, how sad, never mind ...

On 7/19/24 6:41 AM, D wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 19 Jul 2024, Woozy Song wrote:
>
>> Curiously, when I made a post to Reddit linux group, it got deleted
>> immediately. I thought they would be gloating that Windows got shafted.
>>
>
> I'm gloating! I repeatedly tell a potential customer to change from
> windows, and I think so far they asked me for an offer and an opinion 3
> times (they had 3 security incidents), and yet they have never purchased
> my services and they keep running into these problems. I'm gloating so
> much. Sadly I don't think they will ever switch from their beloved
> Microsoft though.
>
> I do use them often as an example of what happens if you have a crappy
> IT-manager so I do derive benefits from their incompetence though! =)

Will any of them LEARN ???

Of COURSE not.

So ... leave them to burn.

On 7/20/24 1:57 PM, Rich wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 20/07/2024 14:44, rek2 hispagatos wrote:
>>> On 2024-07-19, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 19 Jul 2024, Woozy Song wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Curiously, when I made a post to Reddit linux group, it got deleted
>>>>> immediately. I thought they would be gloating that Windows got shafted.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm gloating! I repeatedly tell a potential customer to change from
>>>> windows, and I think so far they asked me for an offer and an opinion 3
>>>> times (they had 3 security incidents), and yet they have never purchased
>>>> my services and they keep running into these problems. I'm gloating so
>>>> much. Sadly I don't think they will ever switch from their beloved
>>>> Microsoft though.
>>>>
>>>> I do use them often as an example of what happens if you have a crappy
>>>> IT-manager so I do derive benefits from their incompetence though! =)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> +1 I hope this serves as a lesson.
>>
>> No, it wont.
>>
>> You dont understan middle management in a company.
>> The IT managers career is best served by spending shitloads of money
>> with a company like crowdstrike which offers impressive legal guarantees
>> in its contracts.
>> Not by implementing a policy with some 'nerdy operating system' that his
>> boss doesn't know how to use. And developing an IT department to service
>> and support it.
>
> You can tell those who have never worked with/in/near a large corporate
> bureaucracy or govt bureaucracy IT department. Those who have never
> seen behind the curtain believe this will result in some kind of
> change.
>
> Those who have (and it does appear you have) recognize crowdstrike for
> what it really is (hint, it is not for "securing" the endpoint systems
> -- that is, at best, a secondary outcome). Crowdstrike's real purpose
> is to provide the IT bureaucracy with "risk insurance" (i.e.,
> Crowdstrike is really an "insurance plan", even if not presented that
> way) such that the IT folk can check a checkbox on their quarterly
> security audit forms that indicates they have "security scanning
> software" installed. It additionally provides those same IT
> bureaucracy folks with a CYA such that if they happen to be
> hacked/exploited, they can CYA and shift blame to Crowdstrike and away
> from themselves.
>
> Any "security" Crowdstrike provides is secondary to this main purpose,
> that of being an "insurance plan" onto which the IT bureaucracy members
> can shift blame should some hack occur.
>
> So in the end, because the next quarters audit's checkboxes will still
> require "security scanning software" be installed, when next quarter
> arrives, and those forms get filled out again, Crowdstrike will still
> be installed, so those IT folks can check the "blame shifting checkbox"
> on the audit form and magically become "secure" for another quarter.

The M$-suckers who replaced me after I retired were of
exactly that mentality. Wonderful cloud stuff AND the
providers offer such WONDERFUL guarentees ! All the
modern boxes checked - "Ain't OUR fault !".

Control, real 'security', comprehension, totally out the
window (ha ha). Shit, they could barely even program five
lines of Python and 'C' source may as well be writ
in hieroglyphics.

Dunno if the CS fiasco screwed them ... I'll have to find
a reason to call and see. There IS a certain satisfaction
in "TOLD ya so !" :-)

And if it wasn't CS last week it'll be something ELSE
next week. Their boxes WILL lock, their 'cloud' WILL
dissipate. It is clear that bad actors can get into
most ANYTHING 'cloudy' these days. Just a matter of time.
Tick, tick, tick ...........

HOME-hosted data/backups/vital-apps/firewalls centered
on Unix/Linux boxes is STILL the best way to go. Save
the 'cloud' for like aux backups (and pre-encrypt as
you should give more faith to UFO Butt-Prober testimony
than their promises to keep yer data confidential).

On 27/07/2024 07:12, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
> On 7/20/24 1:57 PM, Rich wrote:
>> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 20/07/2024 14:44, rek2 hispagatos wrote:
>>>> On 2024-07-19, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 19 Jul 2024, Woozy Song wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Curiously, when I made a post to Reddit linux group, it got deleted
>>>>>> immediately. I thought they would be gloating that Windows got
>>>>>> shafted.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm gloating! I repeatedly tell a potential customer to change from
>>>>> windows, and I think so far they asked me for an offer and an
>>>>> opinion 3
>>>>> times (they had 3 security incidents), and yet they have never
>>>>> purchased
>>>>> my services and they keep running into these problems. I'm gloating so
>>>>> much. Sadly I don't think they will ever switch from their beloved
>>>>> Microsoft though.
>>>>>
>>>>> I do use them often as an example of what happens if you have a crappy
>>>>> IT-manager so I do derive benefits from their incompetence though! =)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +1 I hope this serves as a lesson.
>>>
>>> No, it wont.
>>>
>>> You dont understan middle management in a company.
>>> The IT managers career is best served by spending shitloads of money
>>> with a company like crowdstrike which offers impressive legal guarantees
>>> in its contracts.
>>> Not by implementing a policy with some 'nerdy operating system' that his
>>> boss doesn't know how to use. And developing an IT department to service
>>> and support it.
>>
>> You can tell those who have never worked with/in/near a large corporate
>> bureaucracy or govt bureaucracy IT department.  Those who have never
>> seen behind the curtain believe this will result in some kind of
>> change.
>>
>> Those who have (and it does appear you have) recognize crowdstrike for
>> what it really is (hint, it is not for "securing" the endpoint systems
>> -- that is, at best, a secondary outcome).  Crowdstrike's real purpose
>> is to provide the IT bureaucracy with "risk insurance" (i.e.,
>> Crowdstrike is really an "insurance plan", even if not presented that
>> way) such that the IT folk can check a checkbox on their quarterly
>> security audit forms that indicates they have "security scanning
>> software" installed.  It additionally provides those same IT
>> bureaucracy folks with a CYA such that if they happen to be
>> hacked/exploited, they can CYA and shift blame to Crowdstrike and away
>> from themselves.
>>
>> Any "security" Crowdstrike provides is secondary to this main purpose,
>> that of being an "insurance plan" onto which the IT bureaucracy members
>> can shift blame should some hack occur.
>>
>> So in the end, because the next quarters audit's checkboxes will still
>> require "security scanning software" be installed, when next quarter
>> arrives, and those forms get filled out again, Crowdstrike will still
>> be installed, so those IT folks can check the "blame shifting checkbox"
>> on the audit form and magically become "secure" for another quarter.
>
>
>   The M$-suckers who replaced me after I retired were of
>   exactly that mentality. Wonderful cloud stuff AND the
>   providers offer such WONDERFUL guarentees ! All the
>   modern boxes checked - "Ain't OUR fault !".
>
>   Control, real 'security', comprehension, totally out the
>   window (ha ha). Shit, they could barely even program five
>   lines of Python and 'C' source  may as well be writ
>   in hieroglyphics.
>
>   Dunno if the CS fiasco screwed them ... I'll have to find
>   a reason to call and see. There IS a certain satisfaction
>   in "TOLD ya so !"  :-)
>
>   And if it wasn't CS last week it'll be something ELSE
>   next week. Their boxes WILL lock, their 'cloud' WILL
>   dissipate. It is clear that bad actors can get into
>   most ANYTHING 'cloudy' these days. Just a matter of time.
>   Tick, tick, tick ...........
>
>   HOME-hosted data/backups/vital-apps/firewalls centered
>   on Unix/Linux boxes is STILL the best way to go. Save
>   the 'cloud' for like aux backups (and pre-encrypt as
>   you should give more faith to UFO Butt-Prober testimony
>   than their promises to keep yer data confidential).

Worth noting that insurance is only likely to pay out about 10% of the
cost of this fiasco.

https://www.theregister.com/2024/07/26/crowdstrike_insurance_money/

--
There is nothing a fleet of dispatchable nuclear power plants cannot do
that cannot be done worse and more expensively and with higher carbon
emissions and more adverse environmental impact by adding intermittent
renewable energy.

David W. Hodgins <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> wrote at 20:47 this Friday (GMT):
> On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 16:21:04 -0400, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Jul 2024, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
><snip>
>>> Pardon my ignorance, but what has crowdstrike got to do with Windows?
>
>> They sent out a patch which crashed windows. If you do not have windows,
>> you would not be affected by it.
>
> The people sitting in airports running linux on their laptops or android
> on their phones might disagree with that statement.
>
> It affects all systems running windows and crowdstrike, which includes many
> microsoft 365 cloud servers. The systems impacted includes many airlines,
> government services, financial institutions, etc.
>
> So you don't even have to own your own computer to be affected by it.
>
> Regards, Dave Hodgins

As someone who had to fly the day after the crash and /almost missed my
plane/, it definitely was a pretty big thing.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom