| Recurring |
multiple_organization |
From the provided article [93607], the software failure incident related to a major security weakness in Google's Android software has occurred with multiple organizations. The vulnerability known as Strandhogg has been exploited by thirty-six apps targeting several banks in several countries. This indicates that the incident has affected multiple organizations and their services, not just a single entity. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design |
(a) The software failure incident in the article is related to the design phase. The vulnerability known as Strandhogg was a "major" security weakness in Google's Android software that allowed cyber-thieves to craft apps that could steal banking logins by creating fake login screens inserted into legitimate apps [93607]. This indicates that the failure was due to contributing factors introduced by the system development or updates, specifically a loophole in the Android software design that allowed for the exploitation by malicious apps. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system |
(a) The software failure incident described in the article is within_system. The vulnerability, known as Strandhogg, was found within Google's Android software, allowing cyber-thieves to create fake login screens within legitimate apps to steal banking logins [93607]. The bug was exploited by malicious apps, indicating that the contributing factors of this failure originated from within the Android system itself. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident in Article 93607 occurred due to non-human_actions. The vulnerability known as Strandhogg in Google's Android software allowed cyber-thieves to create fake login screens that could be inserted into legitimate apps to steal banking logins. This loophole was exploited by malicious apps, with 36 apps found to have taken advantage of the vulnerability dating back to 2017. The malware successfully exploited end users to steal money by tricking them into interacting with overlays created by the attackers, rather than legitimate app interfaces. Google took action to close the loophole and investigate its origins, indicating that the failure was primarily due to a security weakness in the software itself rather than human actions. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
software |
(a) The software failure incident reported in the article is primarily due to contributing factors originating in software. The incident involves a "major" security weakness in Google's Android software that allowed cyber-thieves to create fake login screens within legitimate apps to steal banking logins [93607]. The vulnerability, known as Strandhogg, was exploited by malicious apps to trick users into interacting with overlays created by attackers, leading to the theft of money from bank accounts. Google took action to address the loophole and investigate its origins, indicating that the root cause of the failure lies within the software itself. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
malicious |
From the provided article [93607], the software failure incident related to the Android 'spoofing' bug can be categorized as a malicious software failure incident. The incident involved a "major" security weakness in Google's Android software that allowed cyber-thieves to craft apps to steal banking logins. The vulnerability, known as Strandhogg, was exploited by attackers to create fake login screens within legitimate apps to harvest data and steal money from end users. This indicates that the software failure was a result of contributing factors introduced by malicious actors with the intent to harm the system. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
unknown |
(a) The software failure incident described in the article was not due to poor decisions but rather due to a "major" security weakness in Google's Android software that allowed cyber-thieves to craft apps to steal banking logins. The vulnerability, known as Strandhogg, was exploited by attackers to create fake login screens within legitimate apps to harvest data, leading to the theft of money from end users' bank accounts. The incident was a result of a security loophole in the Android software that was exploited by malicious actors [93607]. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence |
(a) The software failure incident in Article 93607 can be attributed to development incompetence. The article reports a "major" security weakness in Google's Android software that allowed cyber-thieves to create fake login screens in legitimate apps to steal banking logins. This vulnerability, named Strandhogg, was exploited by 36 apps dating back to 2017. The article highlights that the complexity of the operating system may have contributed to overlooking such interactions, indicating a lack of professional competence in ensuring robust security measures [93607]. |
| Duration |
temporary |
The software failure incident described in the article [93607] can be categorized as a temporary failure. The article discusses a "major" security weakness in Google's Android software that allowed cyber-thieves to create fake login screens in legitimate apps to steal banking logins. This vulnerability, known as Strandhogg, was exploited by malicious apps dating back to 2017. Google took action to close the loophole and suspended the potentially harmful apps identified by security researchers. The incident is described as a temporary failure as it was caused by specific circumstances, such as the vulnerability in the Android software, which allowed attackers to exploit the system for a certain period until mitigating actions were taken. |
| 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 vulnerability allowed cyber-thieves to create fake login screens to steal banking logins [93607].
(b) omission: The software failure incident is not related to omission where the system omits to perform its intended functions at an instance(s). In this case, the vulnerability allowed attackers to trick users into thinking they were using legitimate apps but were actually interacting with overlays created by the attackers [93607].
(c) timing: The software failure incident is not related to timing issues where the system performs its intended functions correctly but too late or too early. The vulnerability described in the article allowed attackers to create fake login screens to harvest data from users, indicating a direct exploitation rather than a timing issue [93607].
(d) value: The software failure incident is related to a failure due to the system performing its intended functions incorrectly. The vulnerability in Google's Android software allowed cyber-thieves to create fake login screens in legitimate apps to steal banking logins, leading to the incorrect behavior of the system [93607].
(e) byzantine: The software failure incident is not related to a byzantine failure where the system behaves erroneously with inconsistent responses and interactions. The vulnerability described in the article focused on exploiting a security weakness in Android software to steal banking logins through fake login screens [93607].
(f) other: The behavior of the software failure incident can be categorized as a security vulnerability that allowed attackers to exploit a loophole in Google's Android software to create fake login screens in legitimate apps, leading to the theft of banking logins. This behavior falls under the category of a security breach or exploit rather than the specific options provided [93607]. |