> ( ... ) experienced significant disruptions as a result of CrowdStrike updates, raising serious concerns about the company's software update and testing procedures
To me the issue isn't CrowdStrike's testing procedures. To me the issue is why does Debian depend on CrowdStrike? Does anyone understand this?
Debian doesn't depend on CrowdStrike. CS provides Linux clients for organizations that want to deploy it with their Linux workstations/servers.
From the article:
> In April, a CrowdStrike update caused all Debian Linux servers in a civic tech lab to crash simultaneously and refuse to boot. The update proved incompatible with the latest stable version of Debian, despite the specific Linux configuration being supposedly supported. The lab's IT team discovered that removing CrowdStrike allowed the machines to boot and reported the incident.
Debian is as at fault for CrowdStrike's incompetence and negligence as Microsoft is. That is to say, not at all.
Right, thanks for that. My fault for skipping every other word.
This had really soured my day for a bit there, but you brought it back.
Debian is one of those things that I consider a source of stability in my software life, together with git, wikipedia, and openstreetmap. Believing that it depends on some dodgy company really put me in a bad mood.
To me the issue isn't CrowdStrike's testing procedures. To me the issue is why does Debian depend on CrowdStrike? Does anyone understand this?