> "For whatever reason that we don't understand, the employee decided to do a global deployment," Dieken went on. The usual staggered approach was therefore bypassed.
> And the engineer who sidestepped Salesforce's carefully crafted policies and took down the platform? "We have taken action with that particular employee," said Dieken.
Holy contradiction, Batman!
Again - only playing devil's advocate. We'd need to know much more about processes and what actually happened for a better explanation.
It's so easy to rely on DNS names everywhere...
1. They're still using manual processes where automation should be used.
2. They're using insufficiently robust scripts (Forgivable to a degree. Bugs happen)
3. They blame the individual rather than the process which allowed the individual to make this mistake.
4. They have their status page on the same infrastructure that the status page is reporting on.
