100
To what extent, if at all, would have CrowdStrike's faulty update have been easier to deal with with an immutable distro? (lemmy.ml)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by to c/technology@lemmy.world
51 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 33 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Realistically, immutability wouldn't have made a difference. Definition updates like this are generally not considered part of the provisioned OS (since they change somewhere around hourly) and would go into /var or the like, which is mutable persistent state on nearly every otherwise immutable OS. Snapshots like Timeshift are more likely to help.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    Anything that’s updated with the OS can be rolled back. Now Windows is Windows so Crowdstrike handles things it’s own way. But I bet if Canonical or RedHat were to make their own versions of Crowdstrike, they would push updates through the o regular packages repo, allowing it to be rolled back.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    It's a huge reason why I use BTRFS snapshots. I'm a bit more lax about what gets snapshotted on my desktop, but on a server, everything should live in a snapshot. If an update goes bad, revert to the last snapshot (and snapshots are cheap, so run one with every change and delete older ones).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent