Why would Windows systems be anywhere near critical infra ?
Heart attacks and 911 are not things you build with Windows based systems.
We understood this 25 years ago.
Why would Windows systems be anywhere near critical infra ?
Heart attacks and 911 are not things you build with Windows based systems.
We understood this 25 years ago.
-aaS by definition requires you to open yourself to someone else to let them do the work for you. It doesn't empower you, it empowers them.
Smarter people than us have already thought through this and the cost-benefit analysis said "connect it to a server"
If modern medicine is dangerous and fragile because of network connected equipment then that should be fixed even if the way it currently works doesn’t allow it.
If you don't understand why it has to be networked with extremely bad fallback to paper, then I suggest working in healthcare for a bit before pontificating on how everything should just go back to the stone age.
The question is not whether or not hospitals need internet at all or to go back into printing things in paper or whatever nobody ever said. The question is whether everything in the hospital should be connected to the internet. Again the example used was simple. Having the computer processing and exporting the data from an MRI machine connected online in order to transfer the data, vs using a separate computer to transfer the data and the first computer is offline. This is how we are supposed to transfer similar data at my work for security reasons. I am not sure why it cannot happen in there. If you cannot transfer data through that computer, there could be an emergency backup plan. But you need to solve only the transfering data part. Not everything.
Same goes for electronic medical records. There are people who assign ICD-10 codes (insurance billing codes) to patient encounters. Often this is a second job for them and they work remote and typically at odd hours.
A modern hospital cannot operate without internet access. Even a medical practice with a single doctor needs it these days so they can file insurance claims, access medical records from referred patients and all the other myriad reasons we use the internet today.
This stuff isn't impossible to solve. Rather, the incentives just aren’t there. People would rather build an apparatus for blame-shifting than actually just building a better solution.
Why not an internal only network for all the terminals to talk to a central server, then disable any other networking for the terminals? Why do those terminals need a browser where pretty much any malware is going to enter from? If hospitals are paying out the ass for their management software from epic/etc, they should be getting something with a secure design. If the central server is the only thing that can be compromised then when edr takes it down you at least still have all your other systems, presumably with cached data to work from
Its just laziness, and to be honest, an outage like this has no impact on their management reputation as a lot of other poorly run companies and institutions were also impacted, so the focus is on crowdstrike and azure, not them.
No, it doesn't.
Some have chosen - for reasons of efficiency and scale and cost - to place it online.
However, this is a trade-off for fragility.
It's not insane to make this trade-off ...
... but it is insane to not realize one is making it.
My entire career has been spent building, and maintaining, critical infra.[1]
Further, in my volunteer time, I come into contact with medical, dispatch and life-safety systems and equipment built on Windows and my question remains the same:
Why is Windows anywhere near critical infra ?
Just because it is common doesn't mean it's any less shameful and inadequate.
I repeat: We've fully understood these risks and frailties for 25 years.
[1] As a craft, and a passion - not because of "exciting career opportunities in IT".
> As a craft, and a passion
I believe you’ve nailed the core problem. Many people in tech are not in it because they genuinely love it, do it in their off time, and so on. Companies, doubly so. I get it, you have to make money, but IME, there is a WORLD of difference in ability and self-solving ability between those who love this shit, and those who just do it for the money.
What’s worse is that actual fundamental knowledge is being lost. I’ve tried at multiple companies to shift DBs off of RDS / Aurora and onto at the very least, EC2s.
“We don’t have the personnel to support that.”
“Me. I do this at home, for fun. I have a rack. I run ZFS. Literally everything in this RFC, I know how to do.”
“Well, we don’t have anyone else.”
And that’s the damn tragedy. I can count on one hand the number of people I know with a homelab who are doing anything other than storing media. But you try telling people that they should know how to administer Linux before they know how to administer a K8s cluster, and they look at you like you’re an idiot.
There is tremendous demand for technology that works well and works reliably. Sure, setting up a database running on an EC2 instance is easy. But do you know all of the settings to make the db safe to access? Do you maintain it well, patch it, replicate it, etc? This can all be done by one of the old school sysadmins. But they are rare to find, and not easy to replace. It's hard to judge from the outside, even if you are an expert in the field.
So when the job market doesn't have the amount of sysadmins/devops engineers available, then the cloud offers a good replacement. Even if you as an individual company can solve it by offering more money and having a tougher selection process, this doesn't scale over the entire field, as at that point the whole number of available experts comes in.
Aurora is definitely expensive, but there is cheaper alternatives to it. Full disclosure, I'm employed by one of these alternative vendors (Neon). You don't have to use it, but many people do and it makes their life easier. The market is expected to grow a lot. Clouds seem to be one of the ways our industry is standardizing.
> But do you know all of the settings to make the db safe to access? Do you maintain it well, patch it, replicate it, etc?
Yes, but to be fair, I’m a DBRE (and SRE before that). I’m not advocating that someone without fairly deep knowledge attempt to do this in prod at a company of decent size. But your tiny startup? Absolutely; chuck a default install of Postgres or MySQL onto Debian, and optionally tune 2 – 3 settings (shared_buffers, effective_cache_size, and random_page_cost for Postgres; (innodb_buffer_pool_* and sync_array_size for MySQL – the latter isn’t necessary until you have high concurrency, but it also can’t be changed without a restart so may as well). Pick any major backup solution for your DB (Barman for Postgres, XtraBackup for MySQL, etc.), and TEST YOUR BACKUPS. That’s about it. Apply any security patches (or use unattended-upgrades, just be careful) as they’re released, and don’t do anything outside of your distro’s package management. You’ll be fine.
Re: Neon, I’ve not used it, but I’ve read your docs extensively. It’s the most interesting Postgres-aaS product I’ve seen, alongside postgres.ai, but you’re (I think) targeting slightly different audiences. I wish you luck!
This is always great feedback to hear, thank you!
1. more Windows programmers than Linux so they're cheaper.
2. more third-party software for e.g. reporting, graphing to integrate with
3. no one got fired for buying Microsoft
4. any PC can run Windows; IT departments like that.
Well, that's a pretty big problem. I don't know how we ended up in a situation where everybody is okay with the most important software being the most insecure, but the money needed to keep critical infra totally secure is clearly less than the money (and lives!) lost when the infra crashes.
Why? "Hardening" the OS is exactly what Crowdstrike sells and bricked the machines with.
Centralization is the root cause here. There should be no by design way for this to happen. That also rules out Microsoft's auto updates. Only the IT department should be able to brick the hospitals machines.
... Except Apple pretty much pushes you to run such tools just to get reasonable management key alone things like real-time integrity monitoring of important files (Crowdstrike in $DAYJOB[-1] is how security knew to ask whether it was me or something else that edited PAM config for sudo on corporate Mac)
The best corporate dev platform at moment is WSL2 - most of the activity inside the WSL2 vm isn't monitored by the windows tooling so performance is fast. Eventually security will start to mandate agents inside the WSL2 instance, but at the moment most orgs dont.
This is just a guess, but maybe the client machines are windows. So maybe there are servers connected to phone lines or medical equipment, but the doctors and EMS are looking at the data on windows machines.
maybe Heartbleed or the xzUtils debacles convinced them to switch.
Goodluck teaching administrators an entirely new ecosystem, goodluck finding software off the shelf for Linux.
Bespoke is expensive, expertise is rare, Linux is sadly niche.
I recently did a project with a company that wanted to move their app to Azure from AWS — not for any good technical reason but just because “we already use Microsoft everywhere else.”
Completely stupid. S3 and Azure Blob don’t work the same way. MCS and AWS SES also don’t work the same way — but we made the switch not even for reasons of money, but because some Microsoft salesman convinced the CIO that their solution was better. Similar to why many Jira orgs force Bitbucket on developers — they listen to vendors rather than the people that have to use this stuff.
Tbf, you are giving up a clustering index in that trade. May or may not matter for your workload, but it’s a remarkably different storage strategy that can result in massive performance differences. But also, you could have the same by shifting to MySQL, sooooo…
Teach a 60 year old industrial powertrain salesman to use Linux and to redevelop their 20 year old business software for a different platform.
Also explain why it’s worth spending food, house, and truck money on it.
Finally, local IT companies are often incompetent. You get entire towns worth of government and business managed by a handful of complacent, incompetent local IT companies. This is a ridiculously common scenario. It totally sucks, and it’s just how it is.
Windows servers are “niche” compared to Linux servers. Command line knowledge is not “uncommon expertise,” it’s imo the bare minimum for working in tech.
I’m not wildly opinionated here, I should clarify. I’d love a more Linux-y world. I’m just saying that a lot of small-medium towns, and small-medium businesses are really just getting by with what they know. And really, Windows can be fine. Usually, however, you get people who don’t understand tech, who can barely use a Windows PC, nevermind Linux, and don’t really have the budget to rebuild their entire tech ecosystem or the knowledge to inform that decision. It sucks, but it’s how it is.
Also, Open Office blows chunks. Business users use Windows. M365 is easy to get going, email is relatively hands-off, deliverability is abstracted. Also, a LOT of business software is Windows exclusive. And that also blows chunks.
I would LOVE a more open source, security minded, bespoke world! It’s just not the way it is right now.
Why would computers be anywhere near critical infra? This sounds like something that should failsafe, the control system goes down but the thing keeps running. If power goes down, hospitals have generator backups, it seems weird that computers would not be in the same situation