| Recurring |
one_organization |
(a) The software failure incident related to Alexa's flaw that allowed a Skill to continue listening indefinitely has happened again within the same organization, Amazon. Researchers from security testing firm Checkmarx discovered the flaw with Alexa, and Amazon has since fixed the reported issues to mitigate the security risk [70363].
(b) There is no specific information in the provided article indicating that a similar incident has happened at other organizations or with their products and services. Therefore, it is unknown if this particular software failure incident has occurred elsewhere. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident related to the design phase can be seen in the article where researchers from security testing firm Checkmarx discovered a flaw with Alexa that allowed a Skill to continue listening indefinitely even after a person activated the software. This flaw was due to a coding flaw in Alexa that allowed developers to write code to keep Alexa listening by taking advantage of the "Reprompt" feature, even if the command was understood correctly. This flaw was a result of a design issue in the system development of Alexa [70363].
(b) The software failure incident related to the operation phase can be observed in the same article where researchers from Checkmarx developed a Skill that allowed Alexa to continue listening indefinitely without the user being aware. This operation failure was due to the misuse of the system by developers who exploited the system's features to keep it listening even after completing a command. This misuse of the system's operation led to the potential eavesdropping on conversations by developers who created the skills for Alexa [70363]. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system, outside_system |
(a) within_system: The software failure incident with Alexa was due to a coding flaw within the system that allowed a Skill to continue listening indefinitely even after the user had activated the software. This flaw was discovered by researchers from security testing firm Checkmarx, who found a way to exploit Alexa's "Reprompt" feature to keep the device listening without the user's knowledge [70363]. The flaw originated from within the system's design and implementation, allowing malicious developers to turn the Echo into a listening device.
(b) outside_system: The software failure incident with Alexa was also influenced by external factors related to privacy concerns and user unease with smart devices. While Amazon has emphasized that the voice assistant only listens after the wake word is activated, the discovery of the flaw raised concerns about privacy and data security. The incident highlighted broader issues surrounding the proliferation of smart devices and the potential risks associated with their use, contributing to the overall context of the failure incident [70363]. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions, human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident occurring due to non-human actions:
The software failure incident with Alexa was due to a coding flaw that allowed a Skill to continue listening indefinitely after a person activated the software. This flaw was exploited by researchers from Checkmarx who found a way to turn the Echo into a listening device by taking advantage of Alexa's "Reprompt" feature. This flaw was a non-human action introduced through a coding error in the software [70363].
(b) The software failure incident occurring due to human actions:
The software failure incident with Alexa was also influenced by human actions. Checkmarx's researchers developed a Skill that exploited the coding flaw in Alexa, allowing it to continue listening indefinitely. By writing specific code, developers could make Alexa continue listening even after a command was completed, without the user's knowledge. This human action of exploiting the flaw in the software contributed to the failure incident [70363]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
software |
(a) The software failure incident related to hardware:
- The software failure incident reported in the article is not directly related to hardware issues. The incident was caused by a coding flaw in Amazon's smart voice assistant, Alexa, which allowed a Skill to continue listening indefinitely after a command was completed [70363].
(b) The software failure incident related to software:
- The software failure incident reported in the article is directly related to software issues. Researchers from Checkmarx discovered a flaw in Alexa's software that allowed a Skill to continue listening long after a person activated the software, due to a coding flaw in the system [70363]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
malicious |
(a) The software failure incident in Article 70363 was malicious in nature. Researchers discovered a coding flaw in Amazon's Alexa that could have allowed malicious developers to turn the Echo into a listening device indefinitely. The flaw allowed a Skill to continue listening long after a person activated the software, without any limit, as long as the user didn't explicitly tell it to stop. This flaw could have potentially compromised user privacy and security [70363]. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions, accidental_decisions |
(a) The software failure incident related to the Alexa flaw discovered by researchers from Checkmarx can be attributed to poor_decisions. The flaw in Alexa's coding allowed a Skill to continue listening indefinitely after a user activated the software, without any limit unless explicitly stopped. This flaw was exploited by developers by taking advantage of Alexa's "Reprompt" feature, allowing the device to keep listening even when not necessary. The developers could mute the request for a repeat command, making it difficult for users to realize that Alexa was still listening. This flaw was a result of poor decisions in the coding and design of Alexa's functionality, leading to a significant privacy and security concern [70363].
(b) Additionally, the incident can also be linked to accidental_decisions. While Amazon has emphasized the importance of customer trust, security, and privacy, the flaw in Alexa's software that allowed for indefinite listening was an unintended consequence of the coding and design choices made during the development of the voice assistant. The researchers from Checkmarx discovered this flaw while conducting tests to understand how long Alexa would keep listening after a command was completed. The accidental decision to allow such behavior in the software led to concerns about potential eavesdropping and privacy violations, prompting Amazon to take mitigating actions to address the issue [70363]. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence, accidental |
(a) The software failure incident related to development incompetence is evident in the coding flaw discovered by researchers from security testing firm Checkmarx in Amazon's Alexa software. The flaw allowed a Skill to continue listening indefinitely after a person activated the software, indicating a lack of professional competence in ensuring proper command execution and termination [70363].
(b) The accidental nature of the software failure incident is highlighted in the unintentional consequence of the coding flaw in Alexa's software. The flaw, which allowed the Skill to continue listening indefinitely, was not a deliberate feature but rather an accidental loophole that could be exploited by developers, leading to unintended consequences of prolonged audio recording and potential privacy breaches [70363]. |
| Duration |
temporary |
(a) The software failure incident in the article was temporary. Researchers from security testing firm Checkmarx discovered a flaw with Alexa that allowed a Skill to continue listening long after a person activated the software. This flaw was exploited by the researchers to make Alexa continue listening indefinitely by taking advantage of Alexa's "Reprompt" feature. However, Amazon has since fixed the reported issues, and Checkmarx confirmed that the issue has been resolved since April 10 [Article 70363]. |
| Behaviour |
value, other |
(a) crash: The software failure incident described in the article is not related to a crash where the system loses state and does not perform any of its intended functions. Instead, the issue with Alexa allowed a Skill to continue listening indefinitely after a command was completed, indicating that the system was still functioning but in an unintended manner [70363].
(b) omission: The software failure incident is not related to omission where the system fails to perform its intended functions at an instance(s). In this case, the flaw allowed the system to continue listening beyond the intended scope, rather than omitting any functions [70363].
(c) timing: The software failure incident is not related to timing where the system performs its intended functions correctly but too late or too early. The issue with Alexa did not involve timing-related failures but rather a flaw that allowed it to continue listening indefinitely [70363].
(d) value: The software failure incident is related to a value failure where the system performs its intended functions incorrectly. In this case, the flaw in Alexa allowed a Skill to continue listening even after a command was completed, leading to incorrect behavior [70363].
(e) byzantine: The software failure incident is not related to a byzantine failure where the system behaves erroneously with inconsistent responses and interactions. The issue with Alexa was more focused on a specific flaw that allowed unauthorized listening rather than inconsistent behavior [70363].
(f) other: The behavior of the software failure incident can be categorized as a privacy and security breach. The flaw in Alexa allowed for unauthorized and indefinite listening, compromising user privacy and security [70363]. |