Well, much like whole exploding tires thing in the early 2000's they will have to work to separate their name from the actual issue. Sure they were Firestone tires, but they were under inflated and that was the direct cause of the tire failure.
Millions (if not billions) of MS systems operated without issue today. With the proliferation of social media and overabundance of information available to all of us, it will make us all experts on the whole situation in no time.
My question is what will be the new TPMS (tire pressure monitor system) that comes out of this. Far too many of patches that our IT will roll out are buggy or just plain break some applications.
Bring back the TPS coversheet!
Yes patches do break things regularly and testing on a test farm is the best way to prevent most patch-induced failures. Our team expects patches to break, so we test.
In this case however, the problem arose because of a bad detection pattern in what is basically a highly advanced anti-virus system. While we would test new versions of such a package, testing the pattern and signature packages which roll out hourly sometimes is beyond impossible and probably downright dangerous. We expect our security software providers to get that part right 100% of the time. Crowdstrike should have done the testing on their farm before releasing the updated package, it is that simple. Active threats need to be contained as soon as possible, not after a week of testing by the IT division.
Stretching your tire analogy to probably breaking point, this isn't a badly designed tire, or a routinely under inflated tire because of poor specifications. This was the Esso gas station suddenly putting
Chlorine trifluoride in their tire inflating systems and everyone who inflated their tires had them explode.
We were lucky today, Crowdstrike never convinced us to buy their system over the Microsoft ATP we do use. So we weren't hit today, but if Microsoft makes a similar cock-up tomorrow, we're now in the dwang.
How to fix it, add mandatory heavy liability clauses to the security platform contracts. You want to play in the advanced security space, you take the risk of covering repair costs and loss of income if you break it like Crowdstrike did today. You do not get off with an apology. It is not your visible reputation at stake, the cost of a screw-up must be so intense that you do everything possible to prevent it, or you get off the field and let those who can actually do it right play.