That’s my experience as an unfortunate user of a PC as a software engineer in an org where every PC was mandated to install crowdstrike. Fortune 1000.

It ran amok of every PC it was installed to. Nobody could tell exactly what it did, or why.

Engineering management attempted to argue against it. This resulted in quite public discourse which made the incompetence of the relevant parties in it-management related to it’s implementation obvious.

Not _negligently_ incompetent. Just incompetent enough that it was obvious they did not understand the system they administered from any set of core principles.

It was also obvious it was implemented only because ”it was a product you could buy to implement cybersecurity”. What this actually meant from systems architecture point of view was apparently irrelevant.

One could argue the only task of IT management is to act as a dumb middleman between the budget and service providers. So if it’s acceptable it managers don’t actually need to know anything of computers, then the claim of incompetence can of course be dropped.

Because a security software shouldn't be able to cause a kernel panic, but if it can, then the kernel component should be rock solid.

because it took down half the world?

and it shows that the deployment process was not under control and that something malicious could have happened as well

Which part seems dubious to you?