| Recurring |
one_organization |
(a) The software failure incident has happened again at one_organization:
The article reports that Mizuho Financial Group's main banking unit suffered a system glitch, which is the latest in a series of embarrassing system errors at Japan's No. 3 lender. Mizuho had suffered breakdowns between February and March despite a $3.6 billion overhaul of its systems in 2019. This incident follows two large-scale breakdowns in 2002 and 2011, indicating a history of system failures within the organization [117735].
(b) The software failure incident has happened again at multiple_organization:
There is no specific mention in the article about similar incidents happening at other organizations. Therefore, it is unknown if similar incidents have occurred at other organizations based on the provided article [117735]. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident at Mizuho Financial Group was primarily attributed to system development and updates. The article mentions that despite a $3.6 billion overhaul of its systems in 2019, the bank still experienced a series of breakdowns between February and March this year [117735]. Additionally, a report commissioned by Mizuho in June found that its corporate culture, including issues like managers being reluctant to express their opinions and inability to respond well to crises, was to blame for its tech problems, indicating underlying issues in the system development and management processes.
(b) The software failure incident was also influenced by operational factors. The glitch in Mizuho's core banking system affected in-person transactions at branches, indicating issues related to the operation of the system [117735]. Furthermore, the article mentions that Mizuho first detected the glitch on Thursday evening but its backup system failed to operate immediately, highlighting operational challenges in responding effectively to such incidents. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system |
(a) within_system: The software failure incident at Mizuho Financial Group was primarily due to issues within the system itself. The glitch occurred in Mizuho's core "Minori" banking system, which prevented in-person transactions at branches. The article mentions that Mizuho first detected the glitch on Thursday evening, but its backup system failed to operate immediately, indicating an internal system failure [117735]. Additionally, the article highlights that Mizuho had suffered a series of breakdowns despite a $3.6 billion overhaul of its systems in 2019, pointing to internal system issues contributing to the failure.
(b) outside_system: The software failure incident at Mizuho Financial Group does not seem to have been primarily caused by factors originating from outside the system. The article does not mention any external factors such as cyberattacks or external disruptions that led to the system glitch. The focus is more on internal system issues and the bank's own technological challenges contributing to the failure [117735]. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions, human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident at Mizuho Financial Group was primarily due to non-human actions, specifically a system glitch in the core "Minori" banking system that prevented in-person transactions at branches [117735]. The glitch was detected on Thursday evening, and the backup system failed to operate immediately, leading to the disruption in services. This incident adds to a series of embarrassing system errors at the bank, despite previous investments in technology and system overhauls [117735].
(b) Human actions were also involved in the response to the software failure incident. Mizuho's group CEO and banking unit head took temporary pay cuts following earlier tech troubles, indicating accountability for the repeated glitches [117735]. The CEO emphasized the seriousness of the situation and expressed a commitment to beefing up prevention measures to address the recurring system failures. Additionally, a report commissioned by Mizuho in June highlighted corporate culture issues, such as a reluctance among managers to express opinions and respond effectively to crises, as contributing factors to the tech problems faced by the bank [117735]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
software |
(a) The software failure incident at Mizuho Financial Group was primarily due to software issues rather than hardware. The article mentions that Mizuho's core "Minori" banking system suffered a glitch that prevented in-person transactions at branches [117735]. Additionally, the report commissioned by Mizuho in June attributed the tech problems to the corporate culture and management issues within the organization, indicating software-related factors as the root cause of the failures. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
non-malicious |
(a) The software failure incident at Mizuho Financial Group was non-malicious. The incident was attributed to a system glitch in Mizuho's core "Minori" banking system that prevented in-person transactions at branches, affecting the bank's ability to process transactions. The glitch was described as part of a series of embarrassing system errors at the bank, with previous breakdowns occurring despite a significant overhaul of its systems in 2019. The CEO and banking unit head took temporary pay cuts following earlier tech troubles, indicating a lack of malicious intent in causing the failures [117735]. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions |
(a) The software failure incident at Mizuho Financial Group's main banking unit was related to poor decisions. The incident was attributed to a series of embarrassing system errors despite a $3.6 billion overhaul of its systems in 2019. The company had previously experienced breakdowns in 2002 and 2011, indicating a history of technical issues despite significant investments in technology. Additionally, a report commissioned by Mizuho in June highlighted that the corporate culture, including an atmosphere where managers are reluctant to express their opinions and unable to respond well to crises, was to blame for its tech problems [117735]. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence, accidental |
(a) The software failure incident at Mizuho Financial Group was attributed to development incompetence. A report commissioned by Mizuho in June found that the corporate culture within the organization, including issues such as managers being reluctant to express their opinions and the inability to respond well to crises, was to blame for the tech problems [117735].
(b) The software failure incident at Mizuho Financial Group was also characterized by accidental factors. The glitch in Mizuho's core "Minori" banking system was described as a system error that prevented in-person transactions at branches, with the backup system failing to operate immediately when the glitch was detected [117735]. |
| Duration |
temporary |
The software failure incident at Mizuho Financial Group's main banking unit was temporary. The system glitch prevented in-person transactions at about 460 branches, but service was mostly restored by 09:45 a.m. local time on the same day [Article 117735]. |
| Behaviour |
crash, omission, timing |
(a) crash: The software failure incident at Mizuho Financial Group's main banking unit resulted in a system glitch that left branches nationwide unable to process transactions, indicating a crash where the system lost its state and failed to perform its intended functions [117735].
(b) omission: The glitch in Mizuho's core "Minori" banking system prevented in-person transactions at about 460 branches, showcasing an omission where the system omitted to perform its intended functions at that instance [117735].
(c) timing: Although the glitch affected in-person transactions, service at most branches was mostly restored by 09:45 a.m. local time, suggesting that the system eventually performed its intended functions but possibly too late, indicating a timing issue [117735].
(d) value: The article does not specifically mention the system performing its intended functions incorrectly, so it is unknown if this behavior was a factor in the software failure incident [117735].
(e) byzantine: The article does not describe the system behaving with inconsistent responses and interactions, so it is unknown if this behavior was present in the software failure incident [117735].
(f) other: The article does not provide information on any other specific behavior of the software failure incident beyond the crash, omission, and timing issues mentioned above [117735]. |