Because only Crowdstrike's Windows release was broken by them and they didn't fuck it up on the other OS. How is this Window's fault? It's not like that tool was binary cross platform compatible for all operating systems, like Electron VS Code, in order to put the blame on the OS. It's basically a complete different tool tailored to each OS kernel, under the same brand name.
> if Windows was more secure by default there would be less need for 3rd party anti-malware software that can fail so catastrophicall
Which Windows security vulnerability needed the use of Crowsdstrike's tool? How do you measure this security threshold at which you say an OS is so secure that you don't need a third party EDR vendor anymore? You see, here's the problem. That threshold does not exist, since security it's a continuous arms race, and EDR vendors are incentivize to scaremonger you into thinking Windows or whatever OS you use is so insecure and your employees so incompetent and untrustworthy with what they do on their computers that your multi billion dollar won't be able to survive if you don't buy their tool.
And that's partly true to some extents. You can have the most secure OS in the world, but if Bob from accounting runs a script he found online as root then all that OS security was for nothing since the OS can't magically detect that Bob is an idiot and should not run that command as sudo even though Bob has the right credentials for it. That's why companies hire these digital watchmen, to watch over their systems for suspicios behavior since neither Windows, nor MacOS, nor Linux can do this out of the box. The question remains who watches the watchmen? You're now trusting an EDR vendor with the keys to your kingdom instead of Bob.
First of all, whether it is actually Window's fault or not isn't the point. What matters is the perception by the general public and policy makers. And maybe it could have just as easily happened on another OS, but the reason why is somewhat technical, so people who have an agenda can spin it as being MS's fault.
Secondly, it is possible, although I don't think terribly probable, that the bug was influenced by some quirk of the windows platform, although it is impossible to know without more details of the exact nature of the bug.
>First of all, whether it is actually Window's fault or not isn't the point. What matters is the perception by the general public and policy makers
Way to move the goalposts from "How is this Window's fault" to "the perception by the general public and policy makers". I don't think anyone is disputing that some people are blaming Microsoft for this. In fact the whole impetus for this comment chain is me pointing out how the public perception of microsoft being at fault doesn't match up with logic.
There's actually a first-party product: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/defender-xdr/microsoft-365...
I think this is more politically motivated than actually trying to address the real problem.
However I do, think Microsoft deserves some blame, since if Windows was more secure by default there would be less need for 3rd party anti-malware software that can fail so catastrophically. But, Crowdstrike certainly is more to blame for thos particular disaster.