Huge global Microsoft glitch causes planes to be grounded and locks people out of bank accounts

[Grim Reaper 6]

The wheels of certain parts of the world have ground to a halt after a technical issue has resulted in planes being grounded, trains being cancelled and plenty of other places thrown into disarray.

According to CNN, 'a significant Microsoft outage' is the cause of this disruption and it has resulted in planes not being able to take off at airports.

Ryanair said there could be 'potential disruptions across the network' today (19 July) for their passengers, and they're not the only airline to say so.

"Affected passengers will be notified and any passengers travelling across the network on Fri 19 July should check their Ryanair app for the latest updates on their flight," they said in a statement on their website.?

https://www.ladbible.com/news/technology/microsoft-glitch-planes-bank-accounts-140322-20240719

[Abramelin]

I'm watching the developments on the BBC.

Something about a forced update and "The Blue Screen of Death" as result.

It effects banks, supermarkets, airports, and so on the world over.

Edited July 19 by Abramelin

[Essan]

This seems to be just some faulty coding - a error, avoidable, but nonetheless not malicious.   But it shows just how vulnerable the world is.

BBC livefeed:  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cnk4jdwp49et

And from Australia: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-07-19/global-it-outage-crowdstrike-microsoft-banks-airlines-australia/104119960 (for those who don't trust the BBC )

[Unusual Tournament]

Messed up our work computers this afternoon. 

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Not to be too tinfoil… but if ONE company can cripple the world (or at least give it a good whack to the bollox) with a simple error, then that company has too much power. 

Edited July 19 by Sir Wearer of Hats

[Grim Reaper 6]

1 hour ago, Unusual Tournament said:

Messed up our work computers this afternoon. 

It didn’t effect me at all here in Korea, I don’t know about Banks or other businesses.

[Gromdor]

I had to do an update in the home office today.  Yesterday, I was out in the field and didn't notice anything.  

[Chaldon]

I'm on Linux for 10 years. Not going to comment.

[Opus Magnus]

12 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Not to be too tinfoil… but if ONE company can cripple the world (or at least give it a good whack to the bollox) with a simple error, then that company has too much power. 

There are actually a handful of companies that are an oligopoly called the Tech Giants:  Google (Alphabet), Microsoft, Apple, Amazon and Meta.  These 5 companies compete which each other which causes product differentiation and price setting.  If one company goes down another could take over.  Utility companies are also set up as monopolies or oligopolies because it is theoretically safer that way, gives better products and lower prices to the consumer.

Edited July 19 by Opus Magnus

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

2 hours ago, Opus Magnus said:

There are actually a handful of companies that are an oligopoly called the Tech Giants:  Google (Alphabet), Microsoft, Apple, Amazon and Meta.  These 5 companies compete which each other which causes product differentiation and price setting.  If one company goes down another could take over.  Utility companies are also set up as monopolies or oligopolies because it is theoretically safer that way, gives better products and lower prices to the consumer.

Yes … and? 
One error in coding crippled the world and may take weeks to fully recover from. 

[Opus Magnus]

21 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Yes … and? 
One error in coding crippled the world and may take weeks to fully recover from. 

It's probably not safer for systems to be under a competitive market system rather than a monopoly or oligopoly.  The government chooses utility companies to be run under a monopoly for reason.  These reasons are for important resources and monopolies are safer because they have total control.  Monopolies can actually supply a superior product because they can afford more research.  Monopolies can provide significantly cheaper prices to the public because they can cut down costs by utilizing economies of scale.  When the government comes down in judgement on monopolies it is in the interest of maintaining a fair market for other business owners, but this is commonly at the cost of consumers.

Edited July 20 by Opus Magnus

[Dejarma]

everything going digital will be the death of us all.. here in the UK we've had problems.. i've always said it.

well maybe not the death of us but it'll certainly fek things up- in time100 times worse than covid IMO

Edited July 20 by Dejarma

[acidhead]

4 hours ago, Dejarma said:

everything going digital will be the death of us all.. here in the UK we've had problems.. i've always said it.

well maybe not the death of us but it'll certainly fek things up- in time100 times worse than covid IMO

Yes, not the death of us all by no means but certainly open to abuse through manipulation resulting in fear and control. Hopefully it never comes to that but I wouldn't be surprised if it did. 

[acidhead]

https://apnews.com/live/internet-global-outage-crowdstrike-microsoft-downtime 

At the heart of the massive disruption is CrowdStrike, a cybersecurity firm that provides software to thousands of companies worldwide. 

 

[acidhead]

2 minutes ago, acidhead said:

https://apnews.com/live/internet-global-outage-crowdstrike-microsoft-downtime 

At the heart of the massive disruption is CrowdStrike, a cybersecurity firm that provides software to thousands of companies worldwide. 

 

"CrowdStrike"

Where have I heard that company name before?  

🤔

Edited July 20 by acidhead

[acidhead]

President and CEO of CrowdStrike George Kurtz:

 

[Shadowsfall]

22 hours ago, acidhead said:

"CrowdStrike"

Where have I heard that company name before?  

🤔

If you watch F1……probably there….

[Frank_Hoenedge]

As you can imagine; Windows 11 is incompatible with older CPU’s. Compatibility hinges on 2 features: TPM2.0 and DirectStorageAPI. Without both Win11 will not run.

Of course, WEF dreamers will love this.

 

Honest Brits not soo much, here’s why:

In 1984 the UK produced legislation named “Malicious Use of Computers Act”

This law was completely redesigned in 1990 becoming the Computer Misuse Act.

 

In it’s 1990 form, Crowdstrike have contravened Section 3A.

 

Section 3A makes it an offence to even possess software code that can cause the IT problems that affected the globe.

Furthermore, the consent between network operator and 3rd party to update software did not include permission for the malicious code.

 

ChatGPT long form:

If the malicious code was introduced through an update from a third party, it would still likely violate the UK’s Computer Misuse Act 1990, depending on the circumstances surrounding the update. Here’s how different sections of the act could apply:

    1.    Unauthorized Access to Computer Material (Section 1):
    •    If the update was applied without the explicit authorization of the system owner or user, it could be considered unauthorized access. This could be relevant if the third party’s update mechanism bypassed security measures or was installed without proper consent.
    2.    Unauthorized Access with Intent to Commit or Facilitate Commission of Further Offences (Section 2):
    •    If the third party’s update included malicious code with the intent to commit further offenses (such as data theft, fraud, or espionage), it would breach this section. The malicious intent behind the update is a key factor here.
    3.    Unauthorized Acts with Intent to Impair, or with Recklessness as to Impairing, Operation of Computer, etc. (Section 3):
    •    If the update containing malicious code intentionally or recklessly impairs the operation of computer systems, it would violate this section. This includes causing systems to crash, data to be corrupted, or network operations to be disrupted.
    4.    Unauthorized Acts Causing, or Creating Risk of, Serious Damage (Section 3ZA):
    •    If the malicious update causes or creates a significant risk of serious damage to human welfare, the environment, the economy, or national security, it would fall under this section. For example, if critical infrastructure is affected by the update, this section would apply.
    5.    Making, Supplying or Obtaining Articles for Use in Offence (Section 3A):
    •    The third party responsible for creating or distributing the update with malicious code could be held liable under this section. This covers the creation, distribution, or possession of tools intended for committing offenses under the act.

Key Considerations:

    •    Consent and Authorization: If the update was provided and installed with the consent of the system owner but contained undisclosed malicious code, the lack of transparency and intent behind the update would be crucial. Even if the initial update process was authorized, the malicious content was not, making it an unauthorized act.
    •    Intent and Recklessness: The intent of the third party in including malicious code is significant. If the inclusion was deliberate to cause harm or to facilitate further crimes, it clearly breaches the act. Even if the malicious code was included recklessly, without due consideration of the consequences, it could still be a violation.
    •    Impact: The actual impact of the malicious update, such as system impairments, data loss, or broader disruptions, would influence which sections of the act are applicable and the severity of the offense.

Examples:

    •    Unauthorized Update: If the third party pushes an update without proper authorization mechanisms and it includes malicious code, Section 1 could be breached.
    •    Intentional Malicious Code: If the update was intended to harvest user data or create backdoors for further exploitation, Section 2 applies.
    •    Operational Disruption: If the update causes systems to malfunction or data to be corrupted, Section 3 is relevant.
    •    Serious Consequences: If the update impacts critical systems or infrastructure, leading to serious damage, Section 3ZA could be invoked.
    •    Creation and Distribution: The third party creating and distributing the malicious update knowingly breaches Section 3A.

In summary, the use of a malicious update from a third party would likely break multiple sections of the UK’s Computer Misuse Act 1990, particularly focusing on unauthorized access, intent to cause harm, and the actual impact of the malicious code.

 

Unfortunately Sir Starmer is currently being eyeballed to check if his extensive legal background comes to bear on the topic and as yet it’s a typical blind eye.

Not a good start to an appointment as Prime Minister as it echoes the Big Business Yes! Little guy No! Formula that destroys society.

 

 

 

 

[Opus Magnus]

Forced updates are getting into the reasons why monopolies are not liked.  Forced updates may be more of a way to maintain dominance in a market than to help consumers.  Laws against monopolies were unheard of before the end of the 1800's.  The first antimonopoly law in America was the Sherman Antitrust act of 1890.  The main company that was subject to the 1890 act was Standard Oil owned by John D. Rockefeller.  In the beginning there were many oil companies in America in the 1800s, but a war ensued that Standard Oil eventually won.  By manipulating the system and controlling the railroads through rebates, Standard Oil eventually gobbled up all other Oil companies until it controlled 95% of the Oil Industry in America.  It also spread to Europe where it would strangle other companies by having lower prices, offering railroads discounts to move its oil, and then buy out the other oil companies.  This was gruesome for other businesses, but consumers loved it.  Standard Oil made breakthroughs in oil technology to get more out of the oil, cheaper processes to refine oil and to recycle it.  Standard Oil provided consumers with exceptionally cheap oil prices and also Rockefeller was a pioneer in the rights of employees.

Microsoft in the 1990s was accused of antitrust violations when it tried to strangle out Netscape.  Microsoft was accused by the U.S. government of having a monopoly in the operating systems market and using malicious business tactics to deceptively prevent users from using Netscape in Windows rather than Internet Explorer.  Microsoft was split up in the ruling.  Antitrust cases from the beginning were hard to enforce and the corporation come back with a vengeance after they are ruled upon.  The 1890 case was not able to make a ruling on Standard Oil until 1911 under a new presidency.  There were also more industries involved in the 1890 Sherman Antitrust Act like the sugar industry.

In recent years the food industry has struck back against the government for every regulation against it.  This is what is believed to have begun the global diabetes epidemic that began in 1980 as a response to from the McGovern report of 1977.  Rates of diabetes have quadrupled globally since 1980 and type 2 diabetes which used to be called adult onset diabetes began to appear in children which was unheard of before 1980.  This is believed to be because of government regulations that began in the 1980s to install reduced fat options resulted in doubling the added sugar in foods.  This is a paradox that efforts from the government to limit monopoly control have disastrous effects.

Corporate Finance Institute. (n.d.). Microsoft antitrust case. https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/management/microsoft-antitrust-case/

Dietary Guidelines for Americans. (n.d.). Table: History of dietary guidance in the United States and the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/about-dietary-guidelines/history-dietary-guidelines/summary-dietary-guidance-development

Domonoske, C. (2016, September, 13). 50 years ago, sugar industry quietly paid scientists to point blame at fat. NPR. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/13/493739074/50-years-ago-sugar-industry-quietly-paid-scientists-to-point-blame-at-fat

Library of Congress. (n.d.). Standard Oil established. This Month in Business History.  https://guides.loc.gov/this-month-in-business-history/january/standard-oil-established

National Archives. (2022, March, 15). Sherman Anti-trust Act 1890. Milestone Documents. https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/sherman-anti-trust-act

World Health Organization. (2023, April, 5). Diabetes. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/diabetes

 

Edited July 22 by Opus Magnus