| Recurring |
multiple_organization |
(a) The software failure incident related to e-scooter speed restriction hacks has been found to have happened at multiple organizations. Mechanics at various workshops in Kent, East Sussex, and London were offering to override e-scooter software to increase speeds, with some even selling new e-scooters that could travel at speeds exceeding 50mph [125711].
(b) The incident of e-scooter speed restriction hacks has also been reported to have occurred with private sellers advertising hacked e-scooters using online marketplaces [125711]. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident related to the design phase can be seen in the article where mechanics were able to override e-scooter speed restrictions by hacking the software [125711]. This indicates a failure due to contributing factors introduced by the system development or updates, allowing for the manipulation of speed limits.
(b) The software failure incident related to the operation phase is evident in the same article where individuals were using hacked e-scooters on public roads at speeds exceeding the legal limits [125711]. This showcases a failure due to contributing factors introduced by the operation or misuse of the system, leading to safety hazards and accidents. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system |
(a) The software failure incident related to the e-scooter speed restriction hacks can be categorized as within_system. Mechanics were able to override e-scooter speed restrictions by hacking the software, increasing the top speeds beyond the legal limit of 15.5mph [125711]. This manipulation of the software from within the system led to the failure of maintaining the speed restrictions set by the manufacturers. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions, human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident occurring due to non-human actions:
- The incident of e-scooter speed restriction hacks was primarily due to mechanics offering to override e-scooter software, increasing top speeds to more than 21mph [125711].
- Manufacturer Xioami limited all scooters sold in the UK to 15.5mph to conform with the standard set across most of Europe, but the software was being hacked to increase speeds [125711].
(b) The software failure incident occurring due to human actions:
- Mechanics were actively offering to hack the software of e-scooters to remove speed restrictions, with one mechanic charging £15 to override an e-scooter's software [125711].
- The undercover reporter posed as an e-scooter owner intending to illegally ride on public roads and interacted with mechanics who were willing to hack the software to increase speeds, despite knowing it was for illegal use [125711]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
hardware, software |
(a) The software failure incident occurring due to hardware:
- The article reports on e-scooters being hacked by mechanics to remove speed restrictions, which involves overriding e-scooter software to increase top speeds [125711].
- Mechanics were able to override e-scooter speed restrictions by hacking the software, leading to an increase in top speeds [125711].
- One mechanic mentioned that hacking the software to increase speed could cause strain on other parts of the scooter, indicating potential hardware implications [125711].
(b) The software failure incident occurring due to software:
- The main software failure incident in this case is related to the manipulation of e-scooter software by mechanics to remove speed restrictions [125711].
- Mechanics offered to hack the software of e-scooters to increase speeds, highlighting a software-related issue [125711].
- Manufacturer Xioami mentioned limiting all scooters sold in the UK to 15.5mph through software to conform with European standards, indicating the importance of software restrictions [125711]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
non-malicious |
(a) The software failure incident in this case is non-malicious. Mechanics were found offering to override e-scooter software to increase the top speeds of e-scooters, which were restricted to 15.5mph. This action was not with the intent to harm the system but rather to provide users with higher speeds for their e-scooters [125711]. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions, accidental_decisions |
The intent of the software failure incident related to the e-scooter speed restriction hacks can be categorized as both poor_decisions and accidental_decisions:
(a) poor_decisions: The software failure incident can be attributed to poor decisions made by mechanics who offered to override e-scooter software to increase speeds, despite the risks involved. Mechanics were found offering to hack the software to remove restrictions, with one even charging £15 to override an e-scooter's software for illegal use on public roads [125711].
(b) accidental_decisions: The incident also involves accidental decisions or unintended consequences, as some mechanics downplayed the safety risks associated with hacking e-scooters and assured customers that there would be no safety hazards. For example, one mechanic repeatedly claimed there was no risk to the rider or the integrity of the e-scooter when increasing the speed limit [125711]. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence, accidental |
(a) The software failure incident in the e-scooter industry, where mechanics were able to override e-scooter speed restrictions, can be attributed to development incompetence. Mechanics were offering to hack the software to remove speed restrictions, increasing top speeds to more than 21mph [125711]. This action goes against safety regulations and poses risks to riders and other individuals. The mechanics involved in this incident lacked the professional competence to adhere to legal requirements and safety standards, leading to the software failure.
(b) The software failure incident can also be considered accidental to some extent. While mechanics intentionally offered to override the e-scooter software to increase speeds, the consequences of these actions, such as accidents and injuries, were not their direct intention. The incident of a pedestrian being struck by an e-scooter traveling at 20mph on the pavement in Canterbury, resulting in serious injuries, highlights the accidental nature of the software failure leading to real-world harm [125711]. |
| Duration |
permanent, temporary |
The software failure incident related to e-scooter speed restriction hacks can be categorized as both temporary and permanent:
(a) Permanent: The software failure incident can be considered permanent as mechanics were able to override e-scooter speed restrictions by hacking the software, leading to a permanent change in the e-scooter's behavior. This change allowed the e-scooters to travel at higher speeds than the legal limit set by the manufacturers [125711].
(b) Temporary: On the other hand, the software failure incident can also be seen as temporary as the manufacturer Xioami promised to introduce a software update in the coming weeks that would "significantly reduce the likelihood of third party modifications" [125711]. This indicates that the software failure caused by the hacks could potentially be temporary if the manufacturer successfully implements the update to prevent further tampering with the speed limiters on e-scooters. |
| Behaviour |
crash |
(a) crash: The software failure incident related to the e-scooter speed restriction hacks can be categorized as a crash. This is because the software modifications made by mechanics to override the speed restrictions on e-scooters led to the system losing its intended state and not performing its functions correctly. The hacked e-scooters were found to be ridden at speeds exceeding the legal limits, posing safety risks to riders and pedestrians [125711]. |