Global internet outage - Disruption to airlines, banks, media and other businesses worldwide - July 19, 2024

[nhmemorymaker]

But, but, but....Websleuths is online.

I actually do use cash and listen to the radio! LOL. But I can mix and mingle with 2024 too.

jmo

ha ! I'm cash and radio too!!
I mix but don't mingle or mettle .

 

[nerosleuth]

My local natural gas company sent me a text message today informing me that their website was down and providing a phone number to call them if you had to contact them for customer service.

I went to the bank this afternoon and even though they were having PC related issues, they were able to take care of my banking needs.

I also went to the grocery store and paid cash for a couple of grocery items.

WBNS-TV in Columbus, Ohio reported during their 6:00 PM newscast that the outage caused a five hour delay for Columbus LE in issuing an statewide amber alert for a missing young child this morning who was found unharmed and safe before noon today.

 

[Dotta]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1814398929045201191

 

[Eli9]

What is the takeaway from this incident? I caught, only half, of what some talking head said on a show today that recommended that companies/orgs diversify with their tech security providers. Is that the issue? I am NOT tech savy so seriously asking. Is there not enough competition among the tech security industry? Would it be wise to not use one company for every location? LOL, I'm even confusing myself while typing. I guess my point is we now know how many huge companies were using Crowdstrike and who were dealing with the aftermath. Is that in itself a security problem? And should these companies diversify and are they able to?
I probably won't understand the answer so dumb it down please.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

I still use both cash and radios, though the physical radio I use most often only gets internet radio stations.
I have a little pink Bush radio that I use in the bathroom. It's not an internet one. And it runs on batteries so if the power and/or internet is down I can still use it. As long as I have charged batteries, which I do have quite a few of.
I also have a Sony small radio that I don't use much anymore. It's also a battery one.

I've also been in the situation where a shops computer went down but i was okay because I had cash and was happy to not get change.
On another site I'm on there are quite a few people proud of the fact that they "haven't carried cash for years"


Not all of what was before the internet is of no value.

 

[TootsieFootsie]

So many people I know, when something goes wrong, even if it's something small, they have to take it to someone to fix it.
I've fixed my own computers for years. When I got my first computer, I bought the Windows for Dummies book, then after I got more confidence, if something went wrong I googled and found the answer.

I've stopped trying to help my friends, I used to tell them simple stuff like turn the computer off then on again but it seems that even that was too scary

These friends sometimes ask me who I get to fix my computer.

My answer is ME

They could also do it themselves if they were only willing to try.

 

[Snoopster]

What is the takeaway from this incident? I caught, only half, of what some talking head said on a show today that recommended that companies/orgs diversify with their tech security providers. Is that the issue? I am NOT tech savy so seriously asking. Is there not enough competition among the tech security industry? Would it be wise to not use one company for every location? LOL, I'm even confusing myself while typing. I guess my point is we now know how many huge companies were using Crowdstrike and who were dealing with the aftermath. Is that in itself a security problem? And should these companies diversify and are they able to?
I probably won't understand the answer so dumb it down please.

Most large companies have diversified their tech. They recognize the risk of cyber-terrorism. They have all had major tech failures. They remember the great electrical grid failure in Ontario and NE USA back in 2003. They know they are at risk of in-house tech sabotage. Cybersecurity and systems backup plans are a staple for large companies in key industries. It doesn't mean that their can't/won't be disruptions (like today) but it at least reduces their potentially horrendous impact. And, we now see that many companies got their services sorted out later in the day. For smaller companies it can be too large an expense to put in place these redundant systems and processes, and for many of them they aren't in 'critical' industries. But these are real challenges for these companies and their customers.

Of course that is small comfort to people that were impacted in serious ways today.

 

[ch_13]

What is the takeaway from this incident? I caught, only half, of what some talking head said on a show today that recommended that companies/orgs diversify with their tech security providers. Is that the issue? I am NOT tech savy so seriously asking. Is there not enough competition among the tech security industry? Would it be wise to not use one company for every location? LOL, I'm even confusing myself while typing. I guess my point is we now know how many huge companies were using Crowdstrike and who were dealing with the aftermath. Is that in itself a security problem? And should these companies diversify and are they able to?
I probably won't understand the answer so dumb it down please.

In my opinion there are a couple of different issues. First, there's the problem with how these updates are occurring automatically. We don't know the exact course of events that transpired here, but it sure seems like someone on the CrowdStrike QA team dropped the ball. Auto-updates need to go through an extremely stringent testing process before they are released to production. They need a testing environment that mimics actual real-world servers to ensure that their update isn't breaking anything. Techies know how to do this, the problem is that the MBA-types never want to spend the money to do it properly. It needs to be mandated somehow and a third party auditing firm should have to sign off on the rollout process. And, finally, rollouts should be staggered. Instead of doing all the updates at the same time, they should be done over the course of a few days. That may not always possible, especially when it's an urgent security patch, but in this case, even doing a few thousand machines and then waiting an hour to do the rest would have shown that the update was faulty.

The second issue, IMO, is Microsoft's. Right now, programs are allowed direct access to the system kernel. It's the only way to install certain low-level software. This needs to be changed so that a bad software update can't prevent a computer from rebooting. Apple addressed this a few years ago, and in general kernel extensions are not permitted in the Mac OS. (I'm not saying that Apple is perfect and there's no way to brick a Mac. But it's far too easy to do it in Windows with a piece of badly written code from a trusted source.) I don't know exactly how MS can fix this and it will probably take a huge re-write of the existing kernel which can bring on its own bugs and problems. But this problem is at least partly their fault for not being more proactive in trying to snuff out issues like this.