The CrowdStrike-Microsoft Outage: What Went Wrong?

Last week, an IT outage of historic proportions disrupted millions of Microsoft Windows devices, leading to digital mayhem around the globe as frustrated users found themselves staring helplessly at the infamous Blue Screen of Death.

The root cause of the outage was traced back to a flawed software update from CrowdStrike, a leading cybersecurity firm. The outage led to system crashes that were especially disruptive to airlines, banks, and healthcare providers.

This event, which CrowdStrike estimates impacted 8.5 million Windows devices, not only stalled businesses around the globe, it also served as a troubling reminder of the many technical vulnerabilities inherent in our interconnected digital ecosystem. Additionally,  it suggested deep cultural issues that may hamper both CrowdStrike and Microsoft.

“A Cascade of Failures”

In hindsight, calling the CrowdStike update “problematic” is a gross understatement. The update was intended to enhance security features but instead triggered a cascade of failures. This update had a critical bug that, when deployed, caused severe conflicts with the Windows operating system, leading to system crashes and service disruptions across multiple sectors.

Compounding the problem was a concurrent issue with Microsoft Azure's configuration. Azure — which serves as a backbone for many enterprise IT infrastructures — experienced significant disruptions that affected numerous services that depend on it. The combination of these two failures resulted in a proverbial “perfect storm” of IT chaos.

Other companies have encountered update-related issues in the past — although nothing of this magnitude. In past episodes, systemic flaws in update testing and deployment were at fault. Such issues highlight the need for improved coordination between CrowdStrike and its partners, especially Microsoft.

Organizational Issues & Possible Remedies

The deployment of faulty updates often comes down to shortcomings in human oversight. In this case, it appears that critical errors in the development and testing phases were missed, allowing the buggy update to be released.

Although we don’t know the full story yet, both CrowdStrike and Microsoft appear to have exhibited process deficiencies. For CrowdStrike, the lack of rigorous pre-deployment testing and effective rollback procedures may be to blame. For Microsoft, inadequate monitoring and configuration management appear to have exacerbated the impact.

The incident also indicates the possibility of significant cultural and organizational issues within both companies, including:

Groupthink & Consensus Culture: Within both organizations, a culture of consensus and groupthink may have played a role in the disaster. When teams are too aligned (and dissenting voices too suppressed), critical flaws can be overlooked. Such a culture can stifle innovation and lead to a lack of critical examination of new updates or changes.

Misaligned Incentives: There may have also been a misalignment of incentives pushing for rapid update releases before sufficient testing. It’s conceivable that engineering teams faced pressures to deliver frequent updates against tight deadlines, potentially compromising quality for speed. Such misalignment could be the result of top-down pressure to remain competitive and innovate continuously.

Lack of Cross-Functional Collaboration: The incident underscores a lack of effective cross-functional collaboration. Better communication between CrowdStrike’s development teams and Microsoft’s Azure teams may have helped identify potential conflicts earlier and, thereby, mitigate the risk of widespread disruption.

What Happens Next & Potential Solutions

Lawmakers are already calling for Congressional hearings to get to the bottom of the catastrophe, and executives at both CrowdStrike and Microsoft will likely do both some soul-searching and house cleaning.

In the meantime, here are some potential solutions for both organizations to consider:

Enhanced Testing Protocols: To prevent similar issues in the future, both companies need to implement more rigorous and comprehensive testing protocols. They should include a wider array of testing environments and scenarios to catch potential conflicts before deployment.

Improved Rollback Mechanisms: Developing robust rollback mechanisms can provide a safety net. If an update causes issues, it should immediately be rolled back to minimize impact.

Cultural Shifts: Both organizations need a cultural shift that balances both rapid innovation and thorough testing. Encouraging a culture where dissenting opinions are valued can also help identify potential flaws early in the process.

Realigning Incentives: Incentives should be realigned to prioritize quality over speed. Engineering teams should not be pressured into releasing updates without adequate testing. Instead, performance metrics should include the stability and reliability of updates, not just their frequency.

Proactive Monitoring: Deploying advanced monitoring tools can help detect issues early. These tools should provide real-time insights and alerts to potential problems, allowing for swift action before issues escalate.

Multiple Redundancies: Implementing architectures with multiple redundancies can enhance security and resilience. This includes redundant data centers, backup systems, and failover mechanisms that ensure continuity in case of primary system failures. Redundancy minimizes the risk of single points of failure, providing a robust safety net against unexpected disruptions.

Distributed & Decentralized Architectures: Distributed and decentralized architectures can offer significant advantages in reducing single points of failure. By spreading resources and data across multiple nodes and locations, these architectures ensure that a failure in one part of the system does not compromise the entire network. Blockchain technology exemplifies a decentralized approach, providing secure, transparent, and tamper-resistant records.

Deploy Blockchain & AI to Improve Cybersecurity

Although CrowdStrike has reiterated that last week’s crisis was not due to a cyberattack, now may be an ideal time for both Crowstrike and Microsoft to deploy blockchain and artificial intelligence (AI) to reinforce their security efforts.

Blockchain technology would introduce new protocols to enhance cybersecurity. Its decentralized nature and cryptographic security make it highly resistant to tampering and unauthorized access. Implementing blockchain-based security measures could further enhance data breach measures and ensure the integrity of critical information.

AI, meanwhile, is already revolutionizing cybersecurity. AI-driven tools can detect and respond to threats in real time, analyze vast amounts of data for suspicious activity, and predict potential vulnerabilities before they are exploited. The integration of AI enhances the ability to safeguard systems against ever-sophisticated cyber threats.

Companies advancing the use of blockchain and AI are included in the Avestix Venture Capital Fund. If you’d like to learn more about how the Fund is supporting a variety of innovative tech startups, read more about the Avestix Venture Capital Fund here.

About the Author

Ash Aly is the Chief Technical Officer for Avestix Group. His background includes extensive experience as a quantum data scientist, applied machine-learning practitioner, fintech innovator, technologist, and exponential entrepreneur. He earned his degree at the University of Ottawa.