783
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2024
783 points (94.4% liked)
Linux
48653 readers
1110 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Not OP. But that is how it used to be done. Issue is the attacks we have seen over the years. IE ransom attacks etc. Have made corps feel they needf to fixed and update instantly to avoid attacks. So they depend on the corp they pay for the software to test roll out.
Autoupdate is a 2 edged sword. Without it, attackers etc will take advantage of delays. With it. Well today.
I'd wager most ransomware relies on old vulnerabilities. Yes, keep your software updated but you don't need the latest and greatest delivered right to production without any kind of test first.
Very much so. But the vulnerabilities do not tend to be discovered (by developers) until an attack happens. And auto updates are generally how the spread of attacks are limited.
Open source can help slightly. Due to both good and bad actors unrelated to development seeing the code. So it is more common for alerts to hit before attacks. But far from a fix all.
But generally, time between discovery and fix is a worry for big corps. So why auto updates have been accepted with less manual intervention than was common in the past.
I would add that a lot of attacks are done after a fix has been released - ie compare the previous release with the patch and bingo - there's the vulnerability.
But agree, patching should happen regularly, just with a few days delay after the supplier release it.
I get the sentiment but defense in depth is a methodology to live by in IT and auto updating via the Internet is not a good risk to take in general. For example, should Crowdstrike just disappear one day, your entire infrastructure shouldn't be at enormous risk nor should critical services. Even if it's your anti-virus, a virus or ransomware shouldn't be able to easily propagate through the enterprise. If it did, then it is doubtful something like Crowdstrike is going to be able to update and suddenly reverse course. If it can then you're just lucky that the ransomware that made it through didn't do anything in defense of itself (disconnecting from the network, blocking CIDRs like Crowdsource's update servers, blocking processes, whatever) and frankly you can still update those clients anyway from your own AV update server which is a product you'd be using if you aren't allowing updates from the Internet in order to roll them out in dev first, phasing and/or schedules from your own infrastructure.
Crowdstrike is just another lesson in that.