this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2024
569 points (98.0% liked)
Technology
59366 readers
5257 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Misleading title. It was installed by a third-party updater, Heimdall, but MS labeled a Windows 11 update wrong.
They labelled an OS version upgrade as a security update.
Yet another reason to not do auto-updates in an enterprise environment for mission-critical services.
In an enterprise environment, you rely on a service that tracks CVEs, analyzes which ones apply to your environment, and prioritizes security critical updates.
The issue here is that one of these services installed a release upgrade because Microsoft mislabelled it as security update.
Should still be doing phased rollouts of any patches, and where possible, implementing them on pre-prod first.
For security updates in critical infrastructure, no. You want that right away, in best case instant. You can't risk a zero day being used to kill people.
Even security updates can be uncritical or supercritical. Consult the patch notes or get burned lol
Pre-prod is ideal, but a pipe dream for many. Lots of folks barely get prod.
We still stagger patching so things like this only wipe some of the critical infrastructure, but that still causes needless issues.
Wrong.
Microsoft labelled the update as a security update
Do you know that's not a mistake and done fully malicously knowing that? Please give me your source.
Read the fucking article.
The patch id couldnt be any clearer.
And you make absolutely no error?
Besides that:
Should MS have caught the errorenous ID (assuming it truly was errourneous and not knowingly falsely labeled)? Absolutely. Should the patch management team blindly release all updates that MS releases? No?