| Recurring |
unknown |
The article does not provide information about the software failure incident happening again at either the same organization (Tesla) or at multiple organizations. Therefore, the information to answer this question is 'unknown'. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident in the Tesla forum breach can be attributed to design-related factors introduced during the system development or maintenance processes. The incident occurred when a customer, Daniel Eleff, reported an issue with his forum post disappearing and requested forum support from Tesla's customer service. Subsequently, he was granted full administrator powers over the entire forum, allowing him to access and manipulate the personal information of over 1.5 million forum users. This breach of infosec was a result of a higher level of permissions being inadvertently granted to Eleff, indicating a flaw in the design or implementation of the forum's permission system [78349].
(b) The software failure incident can also be linked to operational factors, specifically the misuse of the system. After being granted unintended administrator powers, Daniel Eleff could have misused his access to edit, delete, or restore posts on the forum. However, instead of exploiting this access for personal gain or causing harm, Eleff chose to report the issue to Tesla, demonstrating responsible behavior in the face of the operational failure that granted him unauthorized privileges [78349]. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system |
(a) The software failure incident in the Tesla forum breach can be categorized as within_system. The incident occurred due to a flaw within Tesla's forum system where a customer was inadvertently granted higher permissions than intended, leading to a breach of information security. This breach originated from within the system itself, as Tesla's customer service agent mistakenly granted the customer full administrator powers over the entire forum, allowing access to personal information of 1.5 million members [78349]. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions, human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident in the article was primarily due to non-human actions. The incident occurred because a Tesla customer was inadvertently granted a higher level of permissions than he should have had to the Tesla forum, which allowed him to have full administrator powers over the entire forum, giving him access to the personal information of all 1.5 million members. This breach of infosec was a result of a flaw in the forum's permission settings, not directly caused by human actions [78349].
(b) However, human actions did play a role in the incident as the customer, Daniel Eleff, took steps to escalate his posting privileges on the forum by contacting Tesla's customer service when his post disappeared. The customer service agent then allegedly promised to forward the request to the IT department, which ultimately led to the unintended granting of full administrator powers to Eleff. Additionally, Eleff chose to report the issue to Tesla rather than misuse his newfound powers, demonstrating responsible human action in response to the software failure incident [78349]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
software |
(a) The software failure incident in Article 78349 was not directly attributed to hardware issues. The incident occurred due to a customer being inadvertently granted higher permissions on Tesla's forum, leading to a breach of information security. The root cause was a misconfiguration or oversight in the forum's software system, allowing the customer to gain unauthorized access to sensitive information [78349].
(b) The software failure incident in Article 78349 was primarily caused by contributing factors originating in the software system. The issue stemmed from a flaw in the forum's software that granted the customer full administrator powers over the entire forum, enabling access to personal information of 1.5 million members. This software vulnerability led to a significant breach of information security, highlighting a software failure in the forum's system [78349]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
non-malicious |
(a) The software failure incident in this case was non-malicious. The incident occurred when a Tesla Model 3 customer, Daniel Eleff, reported an issue with Tesla's forum and was inadvertently granted full administrator powers over the entire forum, giving him access to the personal information of over 1.5 million forum users. This access was granted by Tesla's customer service agent who was allegedly baffled by Eleff's request for forum support and promised to forward the request to the IT department. Tesla representatives stated that the customer was granted a higher level of permissions than he should have had, and they revoked the access as soon as it was reported [78349]. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions, accidental_decisions |
(a) The software failure incident in Article 78349 was primarily due to poor decisions made by Tesla's customer service or IT department. Daniel Eleff, a Tesla Model 3 customer, reported an issue with the Tesla forum and requested forum support. Instead of addressing the issue appropriately, the customer service agent allegedly granted Eleff full administrator powers over the entire forum, giving him access to the personal information of all 1.5 million members. This poor decision led to a significant breach of information security [78349].
(b) Additionally, the incident could also be attributed to accidental decisions or unintended consequences. It seems that the customer service agent was baffled by Eleff's request and may have unintentionally granted him excessive permissions without fully understanding the implications. This accidental decision resulted in Eleff gaining unauthorized access to sensitive information on the forum [78349]. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence, accidental |
(a) The software failure incident in the article was due to development incompetence. The incident occurred because a Tesla customer, Daniel Eleff, was inadvertently granted full administrator powers over the entire Tesla forum after requesting forum support from Tesla's customer service. This granted him access to the personal information of all 1.5 million members of the forum. Tesla representatives acknowledged the mistake and stated that the customer was granted a higher level of permissions than he should have had, which was not connected to their vehicles, main website, or other digital channels. They mentioned that they made changes to adjust privileges following a full audit to prevent such incidents in the future [78349].
(b) The software failure incident can also be considered accidental as it was not intentional for Daniel Eleff to gain full administrator powers over the forum. It was a result of a series of events starting from his request for forum support to the IT department, which led to him being granted unintended access to the forum's administrative functions and user data. Tesla revoked the access as soon as it was reported and took steps to prevent such accidental breaches in the future [78349]. |
| Duration |
temporary |
(a) The software failure incident in the article seems to be temporary. It was a case where a Tesla forum user, Daniel Eleff, was inadvertently granted full administrator powers over the entire forum due to a mistake by Tesla's customer service agent. This incident was not a permanent failure as Tesla representatives mentioned that they revoked the access as soon as it was reported and made changes to adjust privileges accordingly following a full audit to ensure it does not happen again [78349]. |
| Behaviour |
crash |
(a) The software failure incident in Article 78349 can be categorized as a crash. The incident involved a Tesla forum user being inadvertently granted full administrator powers over the entire forum, allowing him to edit, delete, and restore posts, as well as access the personal information of all 1.5 million members. This unauthorized access and elevated permissions can be seen as a system crash where the system lost control over its intended functions, leading to a significant breach of infosec [78349]. |