And yet I heard zero peeps about it. Probably because 99% of IT departments know windows is vulnerable as fuck while 99% know that Linux doesn't need babysitting.
"It's technically possible for other OSes to be affected by a thing like this" is a shit argument and you should get the MS dick out of your mouth.
Bruh, I've used Linux for over 10 years. I run Arch on my laptop and have a homelab powered by Proxmox, Debian, and OPNSense. I don't run any AV in my lab but do follow other security practices.
At work it's a different story. Products like CrowdStrike also collect logs, scan for vulnerabilities, provide graphing and dashboarding capabilities, provide integrations into ticketing platforms for investigation and remediation by security teams, and more. AV is often required because Windows users can upload infected files to Linux-run SMB shares. Products like CrowdStrike often satisfy requirements set by cybersecurity insurance.
This is not simping, this is not Linux vs Windows. You just clearly have no experience in the enterprise Linux space and business security requirements.
I don't need to argue about windows vs Linux. You're overcomplicating and misinterpreting my point and it's no longer worth it to me because you clearly are prioritizing defense
Edit: let's see if we can get to 100 downvotes here. I mean this shit is just so offensive right?
Nobody but the most hardcore AMD enthusiasts used Bulldozer. The 2010s was a tough decade for AMD, to say the least. It wasn't until AM5 came out that I finally switched back to Team Red. Got too used to LGA sockets.
I think people are missing the point here. The biggest problem was not that the update was bricking the machines, that could've happened to Linux/macOS/BSD etc. The problem is that the solution to the problem is to MANUALLY access the machine, get into safe mode and type some commands. This is insane.
And you should be able to EASILY disable automatic updates for apps like that on Windows Server.
I dunno, I'd say them deploying an update that bricked machines at the scale they did shows they didn't test it very well at smaller scales. They could have even still used their users as beta testers, just needed to do a subset of them first.