| Recurring |
unknown |
(a) The software failure incident related to the Twitter hack has not been explicitly mentioned to have happened again within the same organization. Therefore, there is no information available in the provided article to suggest a similar incident happening again at Twitter.
(b) The software failure incident related to the Twitter hack, specifically the spear phishing attack leading to the hijacking of high-profile accounts, has not been explicitly mentioned to have happened at other organizations. The focus of the article is on the specific incident that occurred at Twitter in July 2020. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident related to the design phase can be attributed to the spear phishing attack that targeted Twitter employees. The attackers needed access to Twitter's internal network as well as employee credentials that granted access to specific support tools. This indicates a failure in the design of the system's security measures, allowing attackers to exploit human vulnerabilities and gain unauthorized access to internal systems [102545].
(b) The software failure incident related to the operation phase is evident in the hackers' successful exploitation of Twitter employees through social engineering. The attackers managed to access account management tools by using the credentials of targeted employees, indicating a failure in the operation or misuse of the system's access controls and employee training on cybersecurity best practices [102545]. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system, outside_system |
(a) within_system: The software failure incident, which was the massive Twitter hack, was primarily due to internal factors within the system. Twitter mentioned that the attackers needed access to Twitter's internal network and employee credentials to carry out the attack. The hackers exploited human vulnerabilities within the organization to gain access to internal systems and support tools, allowing them to target additional employees with access to account management tools [102545].
(b) outside_system: The software failure incident was also influenced by external factors, specifically a spear phishing attack. The attackers used bogus emails disguised as legitimate ones to trick recipients into revealing passwords or sensitive information. This external tactic of social engineering was a key component in the hack, highlighting the role of external threats in the incident [102545]. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions, human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident occurred due to non-human actions, specifically a spear phishing attack that targeted Twitter employees to gain access to internal systems and support tools. The attackers used bogus emails to trick employees into revealing passwords or sensitive information, allowing them to exploit vulnerabilities in Twitter's network without direct human participation [102545].
(b) The software failure incident also involved human actions, as the attackers needed employee credentials to access Twitter's internal systems and support tools. The hackers exploited human vulnerabilities through social engineering to gain the necessary information and access for the attack to be successful [102545]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
software |
(a) The software failure incident reported in Article 102545 was not attributed to hardware issues. Instead, it was a result of a spear phishing attack that targeted Twitter employees, leading to unauthorized access to Twitter's internal network and specific support tools. The attack relied on exploiting human vulnerabilities rather than hardware-related factors [102545].
(b) The software failure incident in Article 102545 was primarily caused by a social engineering attack on Twitter employees, indicating that the contributing factors originated in software-related vulnerabilities rather than hardware issues [102545]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
malicious |
(a) The software failure incident described in Article 102545 was malicious in nature. It was a massive Twitter hack that targeted high-profile accounts in a cryptocurrency scam. The hack was the result of a spear phishing attack, where attackers gained access to Twitter's internal network and employee credentials to carry out the scam. The attackers used social engineering tactics to mislead employees and exploit human vulnerabilities to access internal systems, demonstrating a deliberate intent to harm the system and deceive users for financial gain [102545]. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions |
(a) The intent of the software failure incident was related to poor_decisions. The Twitter hack was the result of a spear phishing attack that targeted Twitter employees, leading to the compromise of internal systems and tools. The attackers exploited human vulnerabilities within the organization to gain access to sensitive information and carry out the cryptocurrency scam. This incident highlighted the importance of each person on the team in protecting the service, indicating that poor decisions or lapses in judgment by employees played a significant role in the failure [102545]. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence, unknown |
(a) The software failure incident related to development incompetence is evident in the Twitter hack incident reported in Article 102545. The hack was the result of a spear phishing attack that targeted Twitter employees, exploiting their credentials to gain access to internal systems and support tools. This indicates a failure in the security measures and protocols implemented by Twitter to protect against such attacks, highlighting a lack of professional competence in safeguarding the platform against social engineering tactics [102545].
(b) The software failure incident related to accidental factors is not explicitly mentioned in the provided article. |
| Duration |
temporary |
(a) The software failure incident described in the article was temporary. It was a result of a spear phishing attack that targeted Twitter employees to gain access to internal systems and specific support tools. The attackers needed access to Twitter's internal network as well as employee credentials to carry out the hack. The incident was not permanent as it was caused by specific circumstances, such as the social engineering attack on employees, rather than being a systemic issue affecting the software permanently [102545]. |
| Behaviour |
crash, omission, value, other |
(a) crash: The software failure incident in the article can be categorized as a crash as the hackers managed to access Twitter's internal systems, leading to a loss of control over the platform's security and functionality. This resulted in unauthorized tweets being sent from high-profile accounts, indicating a failure of the system to maintain its intended state [102545].
(b) omission: The incident can also be linked to omission as the attackers were able to exploit vulnerabilities in Twitter's system, leading to the omission of security measures that should have prevented unauthorized access to accounts. This omission resulted in the hackers being able to tweet from accounts and access private messages [102545].
(c) timing: While the incident does not directly relate to timing issues where the system performs its functions too late or too early, the fact that the attack was successful indicates a potential timing issue in terms of the system's response time to security threats. The attackers were able to maintain access for a period, suggesting a delay in detecting and responding to the breach [102545].
(d) value: The software failure incident can be associated with a value issue as the hackers used the compromised accounts to promote a cryptocurrency scam, leading to financial losses for unsuspecting individuals who sent Bitcoin to the specified address. This incorrect behavior of the system resulted in monetary gain for the attackers at the expense of users [102545].
(e) byzantine: The incident does not align directly with a byzantine behavior where the system exhibits inconsistent responses or interactions. However, the fact that the attackers were able to manipulate the system and mislead employees to gain access to internal tools could be considered a form of deceptive and inconsistent behavior [102545].
(f) other: The other behavior exhibited in this software failure incident could be categorized as a social engineering attack. The attackers utilized human vulnerabilities within the organization to deceive employees and gain unauthorized access to Twitter's internal systems. This type of behavior goes beyond technical faults and involves manipulating individuals to achieve malicious goals [102545]. |