Fair points,
All of the service contracts I've worked behind say effectively: If we can't keep it from happening, then we can't be held responsible for it happening.
You paid for a managed linux server, linux has a bug and you crash, we are not responsible. We'll patch when it comes out, we'll add a firewall rule to mitigate. But we could not have kept it from happening.
It's pretty weak I know, but one thing I have learned is that there is a lot of conscious and unconscious, communicated and uncommunicated acceptance of risk in many industries.
I advocate for professional , responsible, management and communication of risk in my day to day activities.
I feel like I've done my best work when I can talk to clients directly and honestly about risk, and how we can manage it.
I can do what I can, but I can't worry about or fret about stuff I can't do anything about.
(Which is , I think, basically what you are saying above )
I can do a lot of reasonable things to protect against uncontrolled aspects of operation.
We had only one hard drive and it failed, so we went to a pair of mirrored disks.
We had only one web server and it failed so we went to a cluster of 2 to a bagilion web servers.
We used open source software and it was a hot mess so we .....um hullo? anyone else?
.... Canonical, Microsoft, Redhat, Oracle, Amazon, Google , what have you..
They can do mitigation and management in ways I can't.
I lived and breathed Redhat for along time, and we sold linux under "Redhat is good, redhat can make it go"
They added safety and consistency. I mean it wasn't / isn't perfect, but it worked. It got a lot of stuff done in a short amount of time for us.
Risk management never gets old, it is as old as the first profession ( Prostitution: "Will my primary mate catch me." ) ( Which of course led to the second oldest professions : Lawyers )
P.S. I decided to give email another go, for old-time sake, that's why I revived thethread I guess: I read my mail :)
David