Recurring |
one_organization |
(a) The software failure incident having happened again at one_organization:
The article [112327] reports that the Norwegian Parliament experienced another cyber attack just six months after a previous attack. The previous attack, which was made public in September, was also mentioned in the article. This indicates that the software failure incident happened again within the same organization, the Norwegian Parliament.
(b) The software failure incident having happened again at multiple_organization:
There is no information in the provided article to suggest that the software failure incident happened again at multiple organizations. |
Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident in the Norwegian Parliament's computer systems was linked to a "vulnerability" in Microsoft's Exchange software, indicating a failure due to contributing factors introduced during the design phase of the system [112327].
(b) The operation phase was also a contributing factor in the software failure incident as hackers were able to infiltrate the system and extract data, highlighting a failure due to factors introduced by the operation or misuse of the system [112327]. |
Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system, outside_system |
(a) within_system: The software failure incident in the Norwegian Parliament's computer systems was linked to a "vulnerability" in Microsoft's Exchange software, indicating that the contributing factor originated from within the system [112327].
(b) outside_system: The attack by unknown hackers was mentioned to be an "international problem," suggesting that the hackers infiltrating the system were external to the system, indicating an outside system contributing factor [112327]. |
Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions, human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident in the Norwegian Parliament's computer systems was attributed to hackers infiltrating the systems through a "vulnerability" in Microsoft's Exchange software. This vulnerability in the software allowed the hackers to extract data, indicating a failure due to contributing factors introduced without human participation [112327].
(b) The previous cyber attack on the Norwegian Parliament, which occurred six months before this incident, was attributed to Russia. However, there was no evidence at the time that the two attacks were linked, suggesting that the failure in the previous attack was due to contributing factors introduced by human actions [112327]. |
Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
software |
(a) The software failure incident reported in Article 112327 was linked to a "vulnerability" in Microsoft's Exchange software. This vulnerability in the software allowed hackers to infiltrate the Norwegian Parliament's computer systems and extract data. The incident was specifically attributed to a flaw in the software, rather than any hardware-related issues [112327]. |
Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
malicious |
(a) The software failure incident in this case is malicious. Hackers infiltrated the Norwegian Parliament's computer systems and extracted data, with the attack linked to a vulnerability in Microsoft's Exchange software. The parliament described it as an "attack on our democracy" and highlighted the severity of the incident, especially given the timing close to a parliamentary election and during the handling of a pandemic. The previous attack, also mentioned in the article, was attributed to Russia [112327]. |
Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions |
(a) The intent of the software failure incident related to poor_decisions:
- The software failure incident in the Norwegian Parliament's computer systems was linked to a "vulnerability" in Microsoft's Exchange software, indicating a failure due to contributing factors introduced by poor decisions [112327].
(b) The intent of the software failure incident related to accidental_decisions:
- There is no specific mention in the article about the software failure incident being related to accidental decisions. |
Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence |
(a) The software failure incident in the Norwegian Parliament's computer systems was linked to a "vulnerability" in Microsoft's Exchange software, indicating a potential failure due to development incompetence, as vulnerabilities are often introduced during the development process [112327].
(b) The incident was described as an "attack" by hackers, suggesting a deliberate and malicious action rather than an accidental failure [112327]. |
Duration |
temporary |
The software failure incident reported in Article 112327 was temporary. The incident involved hackers infiltrating the Norwegian Parliament's computer systems due to a "vulnerability" in Microsoft's Exchange software. This incident was described as an "international problem" and was more severe than a previous cyber attack. The parliament president highlighted the severity of the attack, especially given the timing close to a parliamentary election and during the handling of a pandemic. An investigation was ongoing to determine the extent of the data extraction. Additionally, it was mentioned that the previous attack, attributed to Russia, was separate from the recent incident, indicating that the two attacks were not linked [112327]. |
Behaviour |
value, other |
(a) crash: The software failure incident in Article 112327 does not explicitly mention a crash where the system loses state and does not perform any of its intended functions.
(b) omission: The incident does not describe the failure as an omission where the system omits to perform its intended functions at an instance(s).
(c) timing: The incident does not indicate a timing failure where the system performs its intended functions correctly but too late or too early.
(d) value: The failure in the article is related to the system performing its intended functions incorrectly. The hackers infiltrated the Norwegian Parliament's computer systems and extracted data due to a vulnerability in Microsoft's Exchange software, leading to the system behaving erroneously and compromising data security [112327].
(e) byzantine: The incident does not suggest a byzantine failure where the system behaves erroneously with inconsistent responses and interactions.
(f) other: The behavior of the software failure incident in Article 112327 can be categorized as a security breach caused by a vulnerability in the software, leading to unauthorized access and data extraction by hackers. |