| Recurring |
one_organization |
(a) The software failure incident related to Java vulnerabilities has happened again with Oracle's Java software. The article mentions that Oracle issued an emergency fix for its Java software due to security flaws being exploited for identity theft and other crimes. Despite the fix, security researchers highlighted that several critical security flaws remain in Java, and it could take Oracle up to two years to address all identified security bugs in Java used in web browsers [16256].
(b) The incident is not explicitly mentioned to have happened again at multiple organizations in the provided article. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident related to the design phase can be seen in the article where it mentions that despite Oracle issuing an emergency fix for its Java software to block an exploit in web browsers, security experts highlighted that flaws remain which can still be exploited [16256]. This indicates that contributing factors introduced during the system development or updates led to vulnerabilities that could be exploited by hackers.
(b) The software failure incident related to the operation phase is evident in the article where the US Department of Homeland Security's Computer Emergency Readiness Team (CERT) advised users to disable Java in web browsers even after updating to the latest version due to security concerns [16256]. This suggests that contributing factors introduced by the operation or misuse of the system, such as running Java in web browsers, led to the failure. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system, outside_system |
(a) within_system: The software failure incident related to the Java exploit and security flaws can be attributed to contributing factors that originate from within the system itself. The article mentions critical security flaws remaining in Java even after the emergency fix issued by Oracle [16256]. Additionally, the article highlights how Java's security manager could be bypassed, allowing for the execution of arbitrary code written by hackers [16256]. These issues point to internal vulnerabilities within the Java software that led to the software failure incident.
(b) outside_system: The software failure incident also involves contributing factors that originate from outside the system. For example, the article mentions the exploit in Java being actively exploited by hackers to carry out identity theft and other crimes [16256]. This external threat from malicious actors exploiting the vulnerabilities in Java from outside the system contributed to the software failure incident. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions, human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident in the articles was primarily due to non-human actions, specifically vulnerabilities and flaws in the Java software itself. The emergency fix issued by Oracle aimed to block an exploit in Java from running in web browsers, which was actively exploited for identity theft and other crimes [16256].
The security researchers highlighted critical security flaws in Java that remained even after the fix, indicating that the vulnerabilities were inherent in the software and not introduced by human actions [16256].
(b) Human actions also played a role in the software failure incident. The article mentioned the concept of "social engineering," where hackers could make their code appear to come from a trusted source to deceive users into granting permission for it to run [16256]. Additionally, the CERT advised users to disable Java in web browsers unless absolutely necessary, indicating that user actions in enabling Java could contribute to the exploitation of the software vulnerabilities [16256]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
software |
(a) The software failure incident reported in the articles is primarily related to software issues rather than hardware. The incident involves critical security flaws in Oracle's Java software that are being actively exploited by hackers for identity theft and other crimes [16256]. Researchers have highlighted vulnerabilities in Java's security settings, allowing for the bypassing of security measures and the execution of arbitrary code by hackers [16256]. The focus is on addressing software vulnerabilities, such as flaws in Java's security manager, rather than hardware-related issues.
(b) The software failure incident is attributed to flaws and vulnerabilities in the Java software itself. Security experts have pointed out that despite emergency fixes issued by Oracle, critical security flaws still exist in Java, making it unsafe for users to enable Java in web browsers [16256]. The incident underscores the ongoing challenges in securing Java against exploits and the need for continuous software updates to address identified security bugs [16256]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
malicious, non-malicious |
(a) The software failure incident related to the Java exploit can be categorized as malicious. Security experts highlighted that the exploit was actively being used for identity theft and other crimes [16256]. The exploit allowed hackers to bypass Java's security manager and run arbitrary code on users' machines, potentially leading to the installation of keyloggers or turning PCs into part of a botnet for malicious activities. The exploit was actively being exploited, and exploit code was publicly available, indicating a deliberate attempt to harm systems [16256].
(b) The incident also involved non-malicious factors such as flaws in the Java software itself. Researchers pointed out that despite Oracle issuing an emergency fix, several critical security flaws remained in Java, making it unsafe to enable Java again [16256]. Additionally, the exploit demonstrated a failure in Java's sandboxing mechanism, which is meant to restrict the applets' ability to read or write data to the PC but was bypassed by the exploit [16256]. These non-malicious factors, such as software vulnerabilities and failures in security mechanisms, contributed to the overall software failure incident. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions |
(a) The software failure incident related to the emergency fix issued by Oracle for its Java software can be attributed to poor decisions. The incident highlights that despite the fix being released, security experts pointed out that flaws remained in Java that could still be exploited for identity theft and other crimes [16256]. Additionally, security researchers expressed concerns about the effectiveness of the fix and the ongoing vulnerabilities in Java, suggesting that users should not assume it is safe to enable Java again and that Java may always be vulnerable [16256]. This indicates that the incident was a result of poor decisions made in the development and security of the Java software. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence, accidental |
(a) The software failure incident related to development incompetence can be seen in the article where security experts mentioned that despite Oracle issuing an emergency fix for its Java software to block an exploit, several critical security flaws still remained in Java [16256]. This indicates a lack of professional competence in ensuring the software's security and robustness.
(b) The software failure incident related to accidental factors is evident in the article where it was reported that the flaw in Java was actively exploited by hackers, leading to identity theft and other crimes [16256]. This exploitation was accidental in the sense that it was not intended by the software developers but was a result of vulnerabilities in the software that were discovered and taken advantage of by malicious actors. |
| Duration |
permanent, temporary |
(a) The software failure incident in the articles can be considered as a permanent failure. This is evident from the statements made by security experts and researchers indicating that even after the emergency fix issued by Oracle, several critical security flaws remain in Java [16256]. Additionally, the Chief Security Officer with Rapid7 mentioned that it could take up to two years for Oracle to fix all the security bugs identified in Java used in web browsers, suggesting a long-term vulnerability [16256].
(b) The software failure incident can also be seen as a temporary failure due to the emergency fix issued by Oracle to address the exploit in Java from running in web browsers [16256]. The fix updated Java to Java 7 update 11 and set default security settings to "high", prompting users before running Java applets from unknown sources. This temporary measure aimed to mitigate the immediate risk posed by the exploit, indicating a partial resolution to the issue [16256]. |
| Behaviour |
crash, omission, value, other |
(a) crash: The article mentions that the Java software had a critical security flaw that was actively being exploited for identity theft and other crimes, leading to the need for an emergency fix from Oracle to prevent the exploit from running in web browsers. This indicates a failure of the system losing its state and not performing its intended functions [16256].
(b) omission: The article highlights that despite the emergency fix issued by Oracle, several critical security flaws remained in Java, making it unsafe to enable Java again. This omission of fully addressing the security vulnerabilities led to the recommendation to disable Java in web browsers even after updating to the latest version [16256].
(c) timing: The article does not specifically mention any timing-related failures in the software incident.
(d) value: The article discusses how the security flaws in Java allowed for the execution of arbitrary code written by hackers, such as installing keyloggers or turning PCs into botnets. This indicates a failure of the system performing its intended functions incorrectly, allowing unauthorized and malicious activities to take place [16256].
(e) byzantine: The article does not describe any byzantine behavior in the software failure incident.
(f) other: The software failure incident also involved the exploitation of social engineering techniques to deceive users into granting permission for malicious code to run, despite appearing to come from a trusted source. This deceptive behavior is not explicitly covered in the options provided [16256]. |