Why would Cloudstrike need a kernel driver on Windows, and not their other platforms? Microsoft is responsible for that design and not moving past it at the pace alternative systems have.
Additionally, there are other things Microsoft could have done. For example - if your computer fails to boot 3 times in a row, with a third party driver, how about automatically disabling the driver? If the driver manufacturer doesn’t like that, tell them to suck it up and write a driver that doesn’t crash.
You mean the same issues that Linux also faced?
That's not to say that there haven't been other Crowdstrike fails on Linux, especially pre-eBPF module, but that's not one, and that class of failures has been eliminated in the move to the eBPF based module.
Apple evicted these things from kernel access, resulting in better product.
MS is saying they wanted to do the exact same thing, but EU has mandated the access in order to allow multiple products to become rootkits.
https://youtu.be/5KHCLBqRrnY?t=5849
like if apple is doing it, and microsoft is doing it in their ARM build... what is the EU doing or imposing, exactly, that is so problematic for the x86 branch of microsoft?
the more reasonable interpretation (ignoring microsoft's excuses) is that microsoft is more constrained by the legacy nature of their x86 product. they can't just sunset it, because it'll break a billion shitty applications that are very important to one specific factory customer running their thing with a kernel hook that is long-since EOL'd or whatever.
What they mean is they don't want to, and the EU is just a convenient scapegoat for some unfortunate business realities.
No. The EU only mandated that Microsoft give other vendors the same access they themselves use to do the same thing. This was the wake-up call to Microsoft to stop doing it that way, and in stead build a more secure API for themselves as well as others to use. But they preferred to sleep through it, for another fifteen years.
They didn't “want to do the exact same thing”; if they had wanted to, they could have done it.
I don't think computers got to that level of refinement. Yes, we have AI, but this is mostly used to spread propaganda. Last i looked, you cannot fix Linux or Windows without human intervention.
Mostly due to Teams or Edge eating up all the memory, and the OS being unable to handle it gracefully.
So I find it pretty hard to take whatever Microsoft says as the last word on anti-malware, even on Windows, when it's at the same time the biggest purveyor of malware.