Published Date: 2020-07-07
| Postmortem Analysis | |
|---|---|
| Timeline | 1. The software failure incident with the Pittsburgh-branded jack stands happened back in May, as mentioned in Article 102371. 2. Published on 2020-07-07. 3. The incident with the Pittsburgh jack stands occurred in May 2020. [102371] |
| System | 1. Pittsburgh-branded jack stands [102371] 2. Replacement jack stands due to bad welds [102371] |
| Responsible Organization | unknown |
| Impacted Organization | 1. Customers of Harbor Freight's Pittsburgh-branded jack stands were impacted by the software failure incident [102371]. |
| Software Causes | unknown |
| Non-software Causes | 1. Welding defect in a small number of replacement jack stands [102371] 2. Bad welds in the replacement jack stand issued to a customer [102371] |
| Impacts | 1. The impacts of the software failure incident on Harbor Freight's Pittsburgh-branded jack stands included a huge initial recall in May due to locking pawls not correctly engaging, which could cause a vehicle to fall [102371]. 2. A replacement jack stand issued to a customer in June failed due to bad welds, leading to further recalls of the replacement units due to a welding defect in a small number of them [102371]. |
| Preventions | 1. Implementing stricter quality control measures during the manufacturing process to detect welding defects early on could have prevented the software failure incident [102371]. 2. Conducting more thorough testing and inspections on the jack stands before releasing them to the market could have helped identify the welding defect and prevent the need for a recall [102371]. 3. Investing in better training for engineers and inspectors to ensure they are equipped to identify potential defects in the products could have prevented the software failure incident [102371]. |
| Fixes | 1. Conducting thorough quality control checks during the manufacturing process to ensure proper welding of the jack stands [102371]. 2. Implementing enhanced testing procedures to detect welding defects in the jack stands before they are released to customers [102371]. 3. Providing refunds or store credits to customers who have purchased the defective jack stands to mitigate the impact of the failure incident [102371]. | References | 1. Harbor Freight CEO Eric Smidt's announcement [102371] |
| Category | Option | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Recurring | unknown | The provided article does not mention any software failure incident related to either one_organization or multiple_organization. Therefore, the information needed to answer this question is 'unknown'. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) | design | Unknown |
| Boundary (Internal/External) | outside_system | The software failure incident reported in the article does not pertain to a software system failure but rather a physical product failure related to jack stands sold by Harbor Freight. Therefore, the boundary of the incident is outside_system as it involves issues with the physical product itself, such as locking pawls and welding defects, rather than software-related factors [102371]. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) | unknown | The provided article does not mention any software failure incident related to non-human or human actions. Therefore, the information needed to determine whether the failure was due to non-human or human actions is unknown. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) | unknown | The provided article does not mention any software failure incident related to hardware or software. Therefore, the information about the software failure incident related to hardware or software is 'unknown'. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) | non-malicious | The software failure incident reported in the article does not involve any malicious intent. The failure was due to non-malicious contributing factors such as a welding defect in the jack stands, which led to the recall of the products to ensure customer safety [102371]. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) | unknown | The provided article does not mention any software failure incident related to poor decisions or accidental decisions. Therefore, the intent of the software failure incident in this case is unknown. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) | unknown | Unknown |
| Duration | unknown | The articles do not mention any software failure incident related to the duration of the failure being permanent or temporary. Therefore, the duration of the software failure incident in this case is unknown. |
| Behaviour | unknown | (a) crash: The articles do not mention any software crash incidents. (b) omission: The software failure incident described in the articles is related to a physical product (jack stands) and not a software system, so there is no mention of omission of intended functions by a software system. (c) timing: The articles do not mention any timing-related failures caused by a software system. (d) value: The failure described in the articles is related to a welding defect in a small number of replacement jack stands, which is a manufacturing issue and not a software failure related to incorrect performance of intended functions. (e) byzantine: The articles do not mention any byzantine behavior exhibited by a software system. (f) other: The failure described in the articles is related to a welding defect in a small number of replacement jack stands, which is a manufacturing issue and not directly related to software behavior. |
| Layer | Option | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Perception | None | None |
| Communication | None | None |
| Application | None | None |
| Category | Option | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Consequence | property, non-human | (a) death: The articles do not mention any deaths resulting from the software failure incident. [102371] (b) harm: The articles do not mention any physical harm to individuals resulting from the software failure incident. [102371] (c) basic: The articles do not mention any impact on people's access to food or shelter due to the software failure incident. [102371] (d) property: The software failure incident impacted people's material goods as the faulty jack stands had to be recalled, and customers were offered refunds or store credit. [102371] (e) delay: The articles do not mention any delays caused by the software failure incident. [102371] (f) non-human: The software failure incident affected the Pittsburgh-branded jack stands due to locking pawls not correctly engaging and welding defects in some replacement units. [102371] (g) no_consequence: The software failure incident had real observed consequences as evidenced by the recall of the faulty jack stands and the offer of refunds or store credit to customers. [102371] (h) theoretical_consequence: The articles do not discuss potential consequences that did not occur as a result of the software failure incident. [102371] (i) other: The articles do not mention any other specific consequences of the software failure incident. [102371] |
| Domain | manufacturing | (a) The failed system in this incident was related to the manufacturing industry. The software failure incident involved Pittsburgh-branded jack stands manufactured by Harbor Freight [102371]. |
Article ID: 102371