This article is written in New Zealand English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, analyse, centre, fiord) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Page history
This article was nominated for deletion on 19 July 2024. The result of the discussion was speedy keep.
A news item involving 2024 CrowdStrike incident was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 19 July 2024.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Microsoft on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MicrosoftWikipedia:WikiProject MicrosoftTemplate:WikiProject MicrosoftMicrosoft articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
"Despite the losses companies have suffered, CrowdStrike was said to be only minimally liable for the damage or lost revenue caused"
Whether the company Crowdstrike and its staff is liable under civil or penal laws worldwide cannot be determined by a "said to be" analysis of their terms and conditions. The linked source is not authorative.
For instance in Germany Penal Code Section 303v StGB § 303b Computersabotage stipulates "(1) Anyone who significantly disrupts data processing that is of essential importance to another person by... 3. destruction, damaging, rendering unusable, removal or alteration of a data processing system or a data carrier, shall be liable to a custodial sentence not exceeding three years or to a monetary penalty."
Coming from a policy-analysis professional background, I would suggest that this needs to be something like "... CrowdStrike is expected to be only minimally liable for lost revenue and other damages, in most jurisdictions", if this is what is supported by the sources (i.e., if legal- and policy-competent source material is generally saying pretty much what that Wikipedia-summary version arrives at in easily-digestible form). Then cite a bunch of those sources so there is no "according to whom?" problem. The issues in the original wording are multiple: First, "was" is wrongly past-tense. Second, "said to be" implies a statement of fact (or a statement of opinion about a fact), when the fact is indeterminate (depends on legal case outcomes which will take years), and we're really dealing with a prediction, not a factual observation. Third, "damages" in the legal sense is plural, and lost revenue is a subcategory thereof, not something distinct from damages. Fourth, "caused" serves no purpose in this sentence and is just blather. — SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 02:51, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I rewrote that paragraph in the article to actually reflect the linked source anyway, which I think dodges the legal-wording problem. Conkaan (talk) 14:46, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
COI note: Jruderman plans to avoid editing this part of the article directly.
Several sources have noted that this probably wouldn't have happened if the CrowdStrike module had been written in Rust instead of C++. IMO this is the most likely avenue for a legal case alleging "gross negligence" (i.e. so negligent as to negate contract terms that limit liability). Jruderman (talk) 18:43, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If reliable sources support the proposition that the programming language chosen was a causal factor, that is appropriate for inclusion. If it is merely speculation or conjecture, such as probably wouldn’t have happened (without more), that does not appear appropriate for inclusion. Local Variable (talk) 01:42, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why no mention of the issues at Azure that coincided with CrowdStrike's failure? I remember it being in the article. I think it should be at least briefly mentioned, since many people thought it was related to the event at the time.2A04:4A43:424F:DC33:3D59:212C:8E0A:5594 (talk) 02:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following references only a YouTube video and doesn't state what "Fireship" is or why the speaker is relevant or an authority. Does it really belong?
I've now removed it. The video is informative and engaging but a minor YouTuber is not a reliable source, and his personal opinion shouldn't merit inclusion alongside industry professionals and security experts. GhostOfNoMeme05:13, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
