BLU Discuss list archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Discuss] CrowdStrike
- Subject: [Discuss] CrowdStrike
- From: jay at lentecs.com (Jason Normand)
- Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2024 17:09:37 -0400
- In-reply-to: <8c6c43ba-e326-4d00-868f-2228fd982c35@borg.org>
- References: <87h6ce7hsg.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com> <8c6c43ba-e326-4d00-868f-2228fd982c35@borg.org>
> > Probably they had a really complicated test that was supposed to catch > this, but really complicated tests are themselves buggy. Who tested that > the test catches the failures it is supposed to test? Not the > non-existent QA department? > > > -kb > It's hilarious because this is literally their excuse, their statement: "Due to a bug in the Content Validator, one of the two Template Instances passed validation despite containing problematic content data," (https://www.cnbc.com/2024/07/24/crowdstrike-says-bug-in-quality-control-process-led-to-botched-update.html)
- References:
- [Discuss] CrowdStrike
- From: worley at alum.mit.edu (Dale R. Worley)
- [Discuss] CrowdStrike
- From: kentborg at borg.org (Kent Borg)
- [Discuss] CrowdStrike
- Prev by Date: [Discuss] CrowdStrike
- Next by Date: [Discuss] CrowdStrike
- Previous by thread: [Discuss] CrowdStrike
- Next by thread: [Discuss] Is it possible to run Signal on Linux?
- Index(es):