Southwest Airlines, the fourth largest airline in the US, is seemingly unaffected by the problematic CrowdStrike update that caused millions of computers to BSoD (Blue Screen of Death) because it used Windows 3.1. The CrowdStrike issue disrupted operations globally after a faulty update caused newer computers to freeze and stop working, with many prominent institutions, including airports and almost all US airlines, including United, Delta, and American Airlines, needing to stop flights.

Windows 3.1, launched in 1992, is likely not getting any updates. So, when CrowdStrike pushed the faulty update to all its customers, Southwest wasn’t affected (because it didn’t receive an update to begin with).

The airlines affected by the CrowdStrike update had to ground their fleets because many of their background systems refused to operate. These systems could include pilot and fleet scheduling, maintenance records, ticketing, etc. Thankfully, the lousy update did not affect aircraft systems, ensuring that everything airborne remained safe and were always in control of their pilots.

  • bluewing@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Ahhhh, the Technology Trap. The modern world has become a mere handful of bad zeros away from having this house of cards crash down and kill almost everyone.

    Technology is great and makes our modern society comfy and great. But it also can be the Sword of Damocles. When will that slender thread break and kill us all?

  • Deebster@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Hang on, if you’re using CrowdStrike but not getting the updates, then why are you using it at all?

  • qisope@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Or, for your consideration, could it perhaps be because they don’t use crowdstrike?

      • Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        My wife shared this with me yesterday, but I didn’t see it:

        A joke tweet with an attached image of a smart refrigerator. The refrigerator displays a blue screen of death. The tweet reads “I can’t even open my fridge.” Another tweet is replying to it, taking it seriously and indicating they do not embrace smart technology.

        Somebunny is gonna learn those things aren’t windows-based today!

        • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          My old thermostat was basically two teaspoons of mercury that would expand and contract with the temperature to short out two leads. They didn’t let me keep it when I got a new one, but I got the dumbest one they had.

          • btaf45@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            I got a new HVAC and smart thermostat about a week ago. After researching, I decided to hook thermostat to wifi and download app. Mostly all the app does is duplicate the same functionality that the thermostat controls have. I find it handy to have a remote control for the thermostat.

            OTOH I decided not to hook up a new washing machine to wifi and use app. It duplicated the functionality of the appliance controls also, but there was no point in having remove controls for a washing machine.

            The critical thing is that an appliance needs to be fully functional without needing to use wifi and certainly not a phone app.

        • Peffse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Just yesterday I had that exact “Tech enthusiast vs tech worker” meme play out. I wanted a timer to control the electrical outlet for an aquarium bubbler. Saleswoman really wanted to sell me this “smart” controller with an app that can program the outlet.

          Me:“What happens when the app stops working?”

          (saleswoman is frantically flipping the box over for answers)

          Her:“…maybe…it keeps the existing timer?”

          • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’ve got about six smart plugs that all stopped working because of lack of support. I am no longer interested in smart plugs.

          • Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            For only way more time and money, you can buy a zigbee smart plug and a vendor agnostic zigbee hub flashed with FOSS, or you can buy a esp-based board, wire it up with a relay, and flash it with something like esphome.

            Sure, it’s way more money and hours of work (cumulatively), but it won’t lose support!

            • 5redie8@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              I just bought a bunch of TP Link equipment I knew was compatible and loaded up Home Assistant onto a Raspberry Pi. Best of both worlds

              • SyntaxError@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                I bought some TP link Kasa plugs and a couple of years later when I wanted some more the Kasa brand was discontinued and replaced by Tapo in Sweden. Tapo and Kasa only work with their own separate app so I would have had to have two separate apps even though both were TP link. Never bought any more smart plugs.

    • noisefree@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I feel like every article out there is missing this and keeps blaming Windows Update vs an update pushed to a specific piece of software by a third-party developer. I get end-users not understanding how things work but tech writers should be more knowledgeable about the subject they write about for a living.

    • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yeah, what? 3.1 not getting updates has nothing to do with this. Software developed for 3.1 can still be updated. This article is just silly.

      • SSJMarx@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        The interesting thing here is wondering why they never upgraded. Perhaps managing flights digitally just hasn’t changed much since the early nineties and they never needed anything else?

        • irinotecan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Likely the same reason why banks and other financial institutions still use COBOL and Fortran code written in the 1970s or earlier on archaic mainframes: Top management decided at some point it was too expensive to rewrite everything from scratch in some modern language for modern hardware, so they just limp along with what they have.

          A 16-bit app written for Windows 3.x would almost certainly have to be rewritten for modern, 64-bit Windows.

  • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    The fact that they’re running 3.1 is not something to be proud of. They’re probably extremely vulnerable to any other attack.

        • RustyHeater@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Microsoft’s Wolverine for the TCP stack was not available until Windows 3.11. An argument could be made that these systems are defacto air-gapped as they cannot communicate with modern networking.

          • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Youre assuming the article is using “windows 3.1” to mean the exact version of the OS, instead of just the proper name of the OS overall. That probally unlikley.

            Since lacking a network stack tends to limit usability, unless the systems are intentionally air gapped they likely are on windows 3.1.1 or later. Based on Southwest extensively documented and decades long IT neglect that landed its current COO in front of Congress for a previous days long outage, i doubt the systems are intentionally airgapped, as that implies a working and well funded IT department.

            • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Just because it doesn’t have TCP/IP doesn’t mean there isn’t networking. Networks existed before the Internet and its Internet Protocol after all. It wouldn’t be so much air gapped as so archaic that only the most targeted attacks would work, and only if there is an infected PC acting as an intermediate between the Internet and ye olde network. Chances are it was never connected to the modern Internet as the technologies just aren’t compatible.

              • Jagger2097@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                Old doesn’t mean secure. Those old systems have had decades since the last security patch. Even then computer security was barely a consideration for the developers.

                • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  I am not saying it is, normally old systems are the least secure. The bit you’re not getting is that this system is almost certainly air gapped, just not by choice. It can’t work with modern networks. It can’t work with modern viruses. Any exploit a modern hacker would think to use probably doesn’t exist yet. It’s a bit like trying to break someone’s car by putting sugar in the fuel, except they ride a horse. Do you get it yet?

        • palordrolap@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yep. I remember - despite the fact it was old even then - building and connecting a Win 3.11 machine to a TCP/IP office network as a proof of concept back in 2000 or so. I might have even installed Netscape on it. I don’t remember clearly now, but I assume the parts for the computer came out of the spares pile, and were soon recycled back into other machines.

    • Lumisal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      But how many people are looking for Windows 3.1 anything today?

      Well I suppose now there might be more

  • floofloof@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    One X user suggested that the company switch to Windows XP—it’s also no longer updated, and it can run Windows 3.1 applications via compatibility mode.

    Maybe that was a joke, but if anything that would reduce their security. Windows 3.1 and 95 are old enough that they can’t even run most stuff from the last two and a half decades, which probably protects them. XP is just new enough, and plenty old enough, to be very risky.

    • jabathekek@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Reminds me of an episode of Ghost in the Shell where a hacker in a hyper-advanced cyberised society was using floppy disks as a storage medium because they were so slow.

      • FaceDeer@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        One of the background details I liked in Ghost in the Shell was how the high-end data analysts and programmers employed by the government did their work using cybernetic hands whose fingers could separate into dozens of smaller fingers to let them operate keyboards extremely quickly. They didn’t use direct cybernetic links because that was a security vulnerability for their brains.

  • yggstyle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Best feature windows 3.1 has:

    … it doesn’t pop up message telling you to upgrade to windows 11.

  • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    That makes fuckall sense.

    Windows 3.1 not being updated by Microsoft has nothing to do with Crowdstrike rolling out an update to their Falcon Sensor software including a file with 42kB of zeroes.

    On Windows 3.1 you probably can’t run Falcon Sensor, so in that way it could be related. But it seems way more likely that Southwest Airlines simply didn’t use Falcon Sensor on their normal Windows 10 or whatever clients.

    There are probably competitors to Crowdstrike, at least some companies would be customers to one of them.

  • Blaster M@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is the “can’t get a Word Document macro virus because I use the Corel WordPerfect Document type” kind of energy.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    This software is shit Bob! What should we do Bob?

    Well Bob, we should find something compatible with shit!

    Bob, I think I got it! I got this other shit software!

    Genius Bob! Just Genius! 😎