yes please

Microsoft was forced by regulators overseas to allow ring 0 third party software as part of antitrust proceedings.

Interesting - I wasn't aware of that. Gave me a few minutes of interesting googling, thanks.

Looks like some people don't agree that is an excuse.

Also worth remembering is that Crowdstrike stopped RHEL 9 machines booting in a vaguely similar update to their falcon service a few months earlier, so it's not something that is exclusive to Windows. That also needed manual intervention to get vms booting. (I dealt with that one too - but it's easier to roll back to the previous kernel with Linux and we had fewer machines that were running falcon) Not surprisingly, there was a very similar blame game played them.

If my work were to remote wipe, I have assumed that would only affect the (second) user profile which has those apps, and not the main user account.

My understanding is that these tools offer a factory reset, so they would wipe everything. After all - if the phone is stolen, you wouldn't want to just wipe one profile and leave data within another.

You should get a second phone for work related things

Slight correction: OP's employer should get him a second device if they require him to access work email away from his office during work hours.

Don't.

Two reasons:

Many employers require you to install phone-management software as part of the data loss mitigation/data exfiltration requirements - and those requirements might be set by their insurers.

This gives them the ability to remotely lock or wipe your phone at any time - useful to them because they remove company data if you lose your phone, or you leave the company, or are suspended for any reason. Obviously that'll also lose any personal data on the phone, but that's your problem, not theirs. They can also monitor its location and similar things.

That's obviously a reason why you should never, ever, use a work-issued device for personal use - besides it being against their acceptable use policy. If your employer requires you to check email then they are required to issue you the means to do so. They cannot insist that you use any personal devices for that.

It's bad for your mental health.

Keep work to work hours. Keep work devices for work. Keep personal hours and devices for your personal use.

This physical separation requires a little discipline but, having been on all sides of this barrier (employer, employee, suffering with poor mental health, and currently, in good mental health) - I know this to be the only way to achieve a health balance.

Cylance was comparable several years ago. But, as you say, Blackberry bought it. Development effectively stopped at that moment. Reported bugs were going un-triaged and the software stopped moving forwards and AV software that isn't constantly adapting becomes a security risk in itself. The two are not comparable now - CS has a lot of extra features, especially in attack monitoring and analysis.

We were Cylance customers, and we changed to Crowdstrike when our contract expired. It was the right choice at the time, as was our decision to choose Cylance before them. Turns out we have pretty crappy luck.

They have a shitload of big contracts with a great many companies across the world. Money keeps coming in.

Legal actions take time. Years. Sometimes decades.

The software, when it isn't bricking computers, is actually pretty good.

This could equally have been caused by any other software running at ring 0. That's most antivirus software and most drivers. Drivers caused BSODs all the time - the difference here is only one of scale and timing. And, as it turns out, some pretty terrible quality control, test processes and release scheduling - and that is likely to be the focus of many of the legal actions.

Your reference to a hacker is spurious - deliberate vs accidental is a major distinction. As is cause and effect - Microsoft can be seen as equally to blame for allowing software to run at ring 0 and allowing this to happen.

Nice ditty.

What reason do you suggest why “his or her” would be preferable to “their” in this context?

Regional dialect, fluidity of language, variety - even habit.

“It’s grammatically incorrect” argument doesn’t hold much water

Oh, I do respectfully disagree with that, especially when you cite medieval English but reference an American language dictionary as your source.

I could just as viably give "his or hers" as equally valid as "theirs", because it is. We're not newspaper headline writers, nobody penalises us if we use a few more characters for any reason. And you could switch back and forth between them both for variety.

Over the past year Musk has removed all masks and clearly believes he can operate beyond the law. His motives are clearly to watch the world burn. He is an extremely dangerous, unpredictable and powerful man, threatening democracy across the globe.

Our governments need to protect us from him. Brazil's being brave here, I hope they're just the first.

No shit. The amount of far-right propaganda, hate and disinformation it's pushing is so much that it's pretty much over the line as an extremist site now, and I expect it to start getting flagged as that with a lot more organisations.

Musk wants to set the world on fire and X is his box of matches.

I lost a day's holiday, and our team spent 8 man days on this entirely preventable mistake.

$10? Try extending our licence by another year for free, that might start going towards it.