Published Date: 2013-07-25
| Postmortem Analysis | |
|---|---|
| Timeline | 1. The software failure incident where hackers hijacked the software in a car and remotely controlled the steering, brakes, and horn using a laptop happened in July 2013 as reported in Article [20224]. |
| System | The software failure incident involved the hacking of the software in a Toyota Prius and Ford Escape, specifically targeting the software that runs the electronics in these vehicles. The incident highlighted the security risks affecting modern-day cars, where the hackers were able to remotely control various features of the cars using a laptop wirelessly connected to the car's electronics. The specific systems that failed in this software failure incident were: 1. Software in a 2010 Toyota Prius and Ford Escape, including the brakes, steering, speedometer, and the car's electronics [Article 20224]. |
| Responsible Organization | 1. Hackers - The software failure incident in Article 20224 was caused by hackers who managed to hijack the software in a Toyota Prius and Ford Escape, allowing them to remotely control various functions of the car [20224]. |
| Impacted Organization | 1. Car manufacturers such as Toyota and Ford were impacted by the software failure incident reported in the articles [20224, 10828]. |
| Software Causes | 1. The software in a Toyota Prius and Ford Escape was hacked by security engineers, allowing them to remotely control various car functions such as steering, brakes, horn, speedometer, headlights, and seatbelts [Article 20224]. 2. The computerized components in modern vehicles, including those integrated by car manufacturers like Ford, could potentially be broken into by hackers, raising concerns over security vulnerabilities in connected cars [Article 10828]. |
| Non-software Causes | 1. Lack of robust security measures in the software of the Toyota Prius and Ford Escape, allowing hackers to remotely control the car's features [Article 20224] 2. Integration of mobile phone technology into cars, leading to potential vulnerabilities that could be exploited by hackers [Article 10828] |
| Impacts | 1. The software failure incident allowed hackers to remotely control the steering, brakes, horn, and other features of a Toyota Prius and Ford Escape using a laptop [Article 20224]. 2. The incident raised concerns about the security risks affecting modern-day cars and highlighted the vulnerabilities in the software running in vehicles [Article 20224]. 3. The incident demonstrated the potential dangers of having computerized components in vehicles that could be exploited by hackers, leading to safety and privacy concerns [Article 10828]. 4. Researchers were able to gain remote access to the safety systems of a car using an infected audio CD, showcasing the vulnerability of modern automobiles to cyber attacks [Article 10828]. |
| Preventions | 1. Regular software updates and security patches to address vulnerabilities in the software [10828]. 2. Implementing a "white list" of permissible activities to block unauthorized procedures [10828]. 3. Enhancing security measures in the software to prevent remote code executions and unauthorized access [20224]. 4. Conducting thorough security testing and audits on the software to identify and fix potential vulnerabilities [20224]. |
| Fixes | 1. Regular software updates to address vulnerabilities and keep abreast of rapidly-evolving threats [10828] 2. Implementing a "white list" of permissible activities for installed technology to block unauthorized procedures [10828] | References | 1. Security engineers Charlie Miller and Chris Valasek 2. U.S Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency 3. Forbes journalist Andy Greenberg 4. Ford spokesman 5. Researchers from the University of Washington and the University of California, San Diego 6. Brian Contos, security strategist at McAfee 7. Computer scientists at the University of California, San Diego and University of Washington 8. Bill Ford, executive chairman of Ford [Article 20224, Article 10828] |
| Category | Option | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Recurring | one_organization, multiple_organization | (a) The software failure incident having happened again at one_organization: - The incident of hackers remotely controlling a car's steering, brakes, and horn using a laptop by hacking the software inside a Toyota Prius and Ford Escape was conducted by security engineers from Indiana [Article 20224]. - This incident highlighted the security risks affecting modern-day cars and was funded by a grant from the U.S Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency [Article 20224]. - The engineers were able to remotely control various features of the car, such as honking the horn, accelerating and braking, turning headlights on and off, tightening seatbelts, disabling power steering, changing the speedometer and petrol gauge, and preventing the car from powering down [Article 20224]. - The engineers demonstrated these capabilities by taking a test drive with a journalist and showcasing the remote control of the car's functions [Article 20224]. - Toyota and Ford, the manufacturers of the hacked cars, responded to the incident with Toyota claiming its systems were robust and secure, while Ford stated they were taking the hack seriously [Article 20224]. (b) The software failure incident having happened again at multiple_organization: - The article discusses how car manufacturers, including Ford, Porsche, and Toyota, are integrating mobile phone technology into their cars, raising concerns about potential hacking vulnerabilities [Article 10828]. - It mentions a real-life example of a disgruntled ex-employee disabling 100 cars in Austin, Texas, using web-based vehicle-immobilization systems, showcasing a potential vulnerability in connected vehicles [Article 10828]. - Researchers from the University of California, San Diego, and the University of Washington reported being able to gain remote access to the safety systems of a sedan using an infected audio CD, highlighting the vulnerability of modern computerized automobiles to cyber attacks [Article 10828]. - The article emphasizes the potential risks of cyber attacks on vehicles, including scenarios where hackers could remotely trigger tire pressure warnings to carjack individuals or cause collisions by manipulating car systems [Article 10828]. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) | design, operation | (a) The articles discuss software failure incidents related to the design phase. In Article 20224, security engineers were able to hack the software inside a Toyota Prius and Ford Escape, allowing them to remotely control various functions of the car such as brakes, accelerator, speedometer, headlights, and horn using a laptop wirelessly connected to the car's electronics. This incident highlights a failure in the design of the software that made the cars vulnerable to hacking [20224]. (b) The articles also touch upon software failure incidents related to the operation phase. The fear of hackers being able to access car systems and data through the integration of mobile phone technology into vehicles raises concerns about the operation and potential misuse of the technology-crammed cars. The possibility of attacks on safety systems, such as controlling braking and acceleration remotely, demonstrates the operational risks associated with the increasing technology in vehicles [10828]. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) | within_system | (a) within_system: The software failure incident reported in the articles is within the system. The incident involved security engineers hacking into the software inside a Toyota Prius and Ford Escape to remotely control various functions of the cars, such as the steering, brakes, horn, headlights, seatbelts, and more using a laptop [Article 20224]. The engineers were able to exploit vulnerabilities within the car's software to gain remote control over its features, demonstrating the risks associated with modern-day cars being hackable. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) | non-human_actions, human_actions | (a) The software failure incident occurring due to non-human actions: - The software failure incident in Article 20224 was due to hackers remotely controlling the steering, brakes, and horn of a Toyota Prius using a laptop [20224]. - The incident involved security engineers remotely controlling various functions of the car, such as honking the horn, accelerating, braking, turning headlights on and off, tightening seatbelts, disabling power steering, changing the speedometer, and preventing the car from powering down [20224]. - The engineers were able to exploit vulnerabilities in the software of the Toyota Prius and Ford Escape to remotely control the car's features [20224]. (b) The software failure incident occurring due to human actions: - The incident in Article 20224 was initiated by security engineers Charlie Miller and Chris Valasek who hacked the software in a Toyota Prius and Ford Escape to demonstrate security risks affecting modern-day cars [20224]. - The engineers were able to remotely control various functions of the car by sending commands from their laptop, showcasing the potential vulnerabilities in the software [20224]. - The engineers demonstrated the ability to manipulate the car's features, such as accelerating to high speeds, slamming the brakes on, disabling power steering, tricking the GPS, adjusting the speedometer, and honking the horn, all through their actions [20224]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) | hardware, software | (a) The software failure incident occurring due to hardware: - The incident reported in Article 20224 describes a software failure incident where security engineers managed to hack the software inside a Toyota Prius and Ford Escape, allowing them to remotely control various car functions using a laptop connected wirelessly to the car's electronics. This incident highlights a vulnerability in the hardware of the vehicles that allowed external manipulation of critical systems like brakes, steering, and acceleration [20224]. (b) The software failure incident occurring due to software: - The incident reported in Article 10828 discusses the potential risks associated with the increased integration of technology in modern vehicles, where computerized components could be hacked by malicious actors. This highlights the software-related vulnerabilities present in the systems of connected vehicles, raising concerns about the security of software systems controlling various functions in cars [10828]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) | malicious, non-malicious | (a) The objective of the software failure incident was malicious, as it involved hackers remotely controlling the steering, brakes, horn, and other features of a Toyota Prius and Ford Escape using a laptop. The incident was a result of security engineers intentionally hacking into the software of the cars to highlight security risks affecting modern-day vehicles [Article 20224]. (b) The articles also discuss non-malicious software failure incidents related to concerns over the security of technology-crammed cars being hijacked by hackers. These incidents involve potential vulnerabilities in computerized components integrated into modern vehicles, which could be exploited by attackers for financial gain or to cause havoc. Examples include gaining remote access to safety systems of a sedan using an infected audio CD and disabling cars through web-based vehicle-immobilization systems [Article 10828]. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) | poor_decisions | (a) The intent of the software failure incident in Article 20224 was not accidental but rather due to poor decisions. The security engineers intentionally hacked the software in a Toyota Prius and Ford Escape to remotely control various functions of the car, such as the steering, brakes, horn, and more. This was part of a project funded by the U.S Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency to highlight security risks in modern-day cars [20224]. On the other hand, Article 10828 discusses concerns over potential software vulnerabilities in modern vehicles due to the increased integration of technology, which could lead to safety and privacy issues. This scenario is more aligned with accidental decisions or unintended consequences rather than intentional hacking or manipulation of the software [10828]. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) | development_incompetence | (a) The software failure incident occurring due to development incompetence: - The incident of hackers remotely controlling a Toyota Prius and Ford Escape was a result of security engineers from Indiana hacking the software inside the cars, highlighting security risks affecting modern-day cars [Article 20224]. - The engineers were able to remotely control various functions of the cars, such as brakes, accelerator, speedometer, headlights, seatbelts, and horn, by exploiting vulnerabilities in the software [Article 20224]. - The project was funded by a grant from the U.S Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, indicating that the hack was a result of skilled individuals exploiting weaknesses in the software [Article 20224]. (b) The software failure incident occurring accidentally: - The incident of potential car hacking due to the integration of mobile phone technology into vehicles was highlighted at the Mobile World Congress, raising concerns about the security of technology-crammed cars [Article 10828]. - The article discusses the potential risks of computerized components in vehicles being broken into, leading to dangerous consequences, but it does not specifically mention any accidental software failure incident [Article 10828]. |
| Duration | unknown | The articles do not provide information about the duration of the software failure incident related to the hack on the software in a Toyota Prius and Ford Escape. Therefore, it is 'unknown' whether the software failure incident was permanent or temporary. |
| Behaviour | crash, omission, other | (a) crash: The software failure incident reported in Article 20224 involved a crash scenario where security engineers were able to remotely control various functions of a Toyota Prius and Ford Escape by hacking into the software. They were able to remotely control the brakes, accelerator, headlights, seatbelts, power steering, speedometer, and horn, demonstrating a loss of control over the car's functions [Article 20224]. (b) omission: The software failure incident also involved instances of omission where the system omitted to perform its intended functions. For example, the engineers were able to prevent the car from powering down to drain the battery, indicating a failure of the system to shut down properly [Article 20224]. (c) timing: There is no specific mention of a timing-related failure in the articles provided. (d) value: The software failure incident did not involve the system performing its intended functions incorrectly. (e) byzantine: The software failure incident did not exhibit behaviors of inconsistent responses or interactions. (f) other: The software failure incident also showcased a behavior where the system was manipulated to perform functions beyond its normal operations, such as changing the speedometer reading, tricking the GPS into showing a different location, and disabling the power steering, indicating an unauthorized control over the car's systems [Article 20224]. |
| Layer | Option | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Perception | sensor, actuator, processing_unit, network_communication, embedded_software | (a) sensor: The software failure incident reported in Article 20224 involved hackers remotely controlling various aspects of a Toyota Prius and Ford Escape by exploiting vulnerabilities in the software. The hackers were able to manipulate the brakes, accelerator, speedometer, headlights, seatbelts, and horn using a laptop wirelessly connected to the car's electronics. This manipulation indicates a failure related to the sensor layer of the cyber-physical system, as the sensors were providing incorrect data or responding to false inputs from the hackers [20224]. (b) actuator: The incident described in Article 20224 also involved the hackers remotely controlling the actuator components of the vehicles, such as the brakes, accelerator, and power steering. By being able to manipulate these physical components through the software vulnerabilities, it points to a failure related to the actuator layer of the cyber-physical system [20224]. (c) processing_unit: The software failure incident in Article 20224 highlighted the ability of the hackers to remotely control various functions of the vehicles by sending commands from their laptop. This indicates a failure related to the processing unit layer of the cyber-physical system, where the processing unit was compromised or manipulated to execute unauthorized commands [20224]. (d) network_communication: The incident reported in Article 20224 involved the hackers exploiting Bluetooth bugs and vulnerabilities in the network communication systems of the Toyota Prius and Ford Escape. By hacking into the network and sending remote code executions from a mobile device, the hackers were able to remotely control the cars' features, indicating a failure related to the network communication layer of the cyber-physical system [20224]. (e) embedded_software: The software failure incident in Article 20224 was primarily caused by the hackers exploiting vulnerabilities in the embedded software that runs on the operating system of the vehicles. By hacking into this embedded software, the hackers were able to gain control over various functions of the cars, highlighting a failure related to the embedded software layer of the cyber-physical system [20224]. |
| Communication | unknown | The articles do not provide information about a software failure incident related to the communication layer of the cyber physical system that failed. |
| Application | TRUE | The software failure incident described in the articles was related to the application layer of the cyber physical system. The incident involved security engineers hacking into the software inside a Toyota Prius and Ford Escape, allowing them to remotely control various functions of the cars such as steering, brakes, accelerator, speedometer, headlights, seatbelts, and horn using a laptop wirelessly connected to the car's electronics [Article 20224]. This incident was a result of exploiting vulnerabilities in the software running on the cars, demonstrating the potential risks associated with modern-day cars being hackable through their software systems. |
| Category | Option | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Consequence | harm, property, non-human, theoretical_consequence | (a) death: People lost their lives due to the software failure - No information about people losing their lives due to the software failure incident was mentioned in the articles [Article 20224, Article 10828]. (b) harm: People were physically harmed due to the software failure - The articles discussed the potential for physical harm resulting from software failures in cars, such as the nightmare scenario of cars on a bridge experiencing conflicting acceleration and braking commands due to a remote attack [Article 10828]. (c) basic: People's access to food or shelter was impacted because of the software failure - No information about people's access to food or shelter being impacted due to the software failure incident was provided in the articles [Article 20224, Article 10828]. (d) property: People's material goods, money, or data was impacted due to the software failure - The articles highlighted the potential impact on property in terms of vehicles being remotely controlled, disabled, or manipulated by hackers due to software vulnerabilities [Article 20224, Article 10828]. (e) delay: People had to postpone an activity due to the software failure - No specific mention of people having to postpone activities due to the software failure incident was made in the articles [Article 20224, Article 10828]. (f) non-human: Non-human entities were impacted due to the software failure - The software failure incident primarily involved the hacking and manipulation of cars, which are non-human entities, by exploiting software vulnerabilities [Article 20224, Article 10828]. (g) no_consequence: There were no real observed consequences of the software failure - The articles clearly outlined the potential consequences and risks associated with software failures in cars, emphasizing the dangers of hackers gaining control over vehicle systems [Article 20224, Article 10828]. (h) theoretical_consequence: There were potential consequences discussed of the software failure that did not occur - The articles discussed theoretical consequences of software failures in cars, such as remote attacks causing collisions, triggering tire pressure warnings for carjacking, and potential privacy breaches due to personal data stored in vehicles [Article 10828]. (i) other: Was there consequence(s) of the software failure not described in the (a to h) options? What is the other consequence(s)? - No other specific consequences of the software failure incident were mentioned in the articles [Article 20224, Article 10828]. |
| Domain | transportation, manufacturing | (a) The failed system was related to the transportation industry, specifically affecting modern-day cars like the Toyota Prius and Ford Escape. The software in these vehicles was hacked by security engineers, allowing them to remotely control various functions such as steering, brakes, accelerator, speedometer, headlights, seatbelts, and horn using a laptop [Article 20224]. (b) The incident pertains to the transportation industry as it involved the hacking of software in cars like the Toyota Prius and Ford Escape, enabling remote control of critical functions such as steering, brakes, and accelerator [Article 20224]. (c) The software failure incident does not directly relate to the extraction of materials from Earth. (d) The software failure incident does not directly relate to the exchange of money for products. (e) The software failure incident does not directly relate to creating the built environment. (f) The failed system was associated with the manufacturing industry as it involved the hacking of software in cars like the Toyota Prius and Ford Escape, allowing remote control of functions related to the manufacturing of these vehicles [Article 20224]. (g) The incident does not directly relate to power, gas, steam, water, and sewage services. (h) The software failure incident does not directly relate to manipulating and moving money for profit. (i) The failed system does not directly relate to education, research, or space exploration. (j) The software failure incident does not directly relate to the healthcare, health insurance, or food industries. (k) The incident does not directly relate to arts, sports, hospitality, or tourism. (l) The failed system does not directly relate to politics, defense, justice, taxes, or public services. (m) The software failure incident is not directly related to any of the industries described in options (a) to (l). |
Article ID: 20224
Article ID: 10828