News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:One Fastly customer triggered internet meltdown by iainmerrick on Wednesday June 09, 2021 @08:44AM (#27447232)
I know you’re mostly joking, but it does no such thing. The blog post explicitly states it was a “valid customer configuration change”.
Re:One Fastly customer triggered internet meltdown by pdpi on Wednesday June 09, 2021 @08:54AM (#27447319)
The Fastly blog does not blame the user. The BBC article kind of suggests it ("One Fastly customer triggered internet meltdown").
Re:One Fastly customer triggered internet meltdown by ceejayoz on Wednesday June 09, 2021 @09:13AM (#27447476)
The BBC article includes the line "a customer quite legitimately changing their settings had exposed a bug".
Re:One Fastly customer triggered internet meltdown by oneeyedpigeon on Wednesday June 09, 2021 @09:22AM (#27447559)
That's 'bottom of a locked filing cabinet in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the Leopard"'-level stuff compared to the clickbait headline, though.
Re:One Fastly customer triggered internet meltdown by ceejayoz on Wednesday June 09, 2021 @09:30AM (#27447627)
What's your proposed headline?
Re:One Fastly customer triggered internet meltdown by oneeyedpigeon on Wednesday June 09, 2021 @09:32AM (#27447649)
Fastly bug triggered internet meltdown
Re:One Fastly customer triggered internet meltdown by ceejayoz on Wednesday June 09, 2021 @10:39AM (#27448405)
That's a great headline for yesterday.

This article details a new piece of information, and the headline reflects that.

Re:One Fastly customer triggered internet meltdown by iainmerrick on Wednesday June 09, 2021 @08:59AM (#27447354)
Yeah, you’re right, the headline is clickbaity.
Re:One Fastly customer triggered internet meltdown by jiveturkey on Wednesday June 09, 2021 @11:23AM (#27448983)
No, it is designed to be suggestive -- to shift attention and perhaps even blame. And of course the BBC picked up on it for clickbait reasons. Brilliant (but perhaps evil) PR by Fastly.

Customer configuration is an irrelevant detail that should have been left out until a full RCA. What does it matter that it was valid? So an invalid configuration would have meant it was indeed the _customer's_ fault??

A more fair treatment would have been, "a customer pentested us and won".