| Recurring |
one_organization |
(a) The software failure incident of the Touch ID fingerprint sensor being susceptible to a hack has happened again within the same organization, Apple. The article mentions that security researchers were able to use a low-budget technique to fake fingerprints and unlock the iPhone 6, similar to what was done with the iPhone 5S in 2013 [30087].
(b) The software failure incident of the Touch ID vulnerability has also been highlighted as a concern for Apple Pay, a system that uses the iPhone's near-field communication chip and credit card management software with Touch ID. The article raises the question of potential security risks with Touch ID becoming the security touchstone for Apple Pay and criminals potentially exploiting the system [30087]. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident related to the design phase can be seen in the article. The Touch ID fingerprint sensor on the iPhone 6 and iPhone 5S was susceptible to a hack that allowed fake fingerprints to fool the system. Despite security improvements, the flaw in the sensor design remained, allowing for the same low-budget technique to be used to hack both devices [30087].
(b) The software failure incident related to the operation phase is evident in the article as well. The Touch ID system's vulnerability to fake fingerprints could lead to potential problems down the line, especially with the upcoming integration of Touch ID with Apple Pay. Security researcher Marc Rogers expressed concerns about the security implications of turning the iPhone into a giant credit card and the potential actions criminals might take to exploit the system [30087]. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system |
(a) within_system: The software failure incident related to the Touch ID vulnerability on the iPhone 6 and iPhone 5S can be categorized as within_system. The vulnerability in the Touch ID fingerprint sensor was due to flaws in the sensor technology itself, allowing for fake fingerprints to bypass the security measures. Security researchers highlighted that there was little improvement in the sensor between the two devices, indicating an inherent weakness within the system [30087]. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions, human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident related to non-human actions in the provided article is the susceptibility of the Touch ID fingerprint readers on the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus to a 12-year-old hack. The vulnerability allows faked fingerprints to fool the Touch ID fingerprint sensor, indicating a flaw in the software's design or implementation [30087].
(b) The software failure incident related to human actions in the article involves the disappointment expressed by Marc Rogers, the chief security researcher at Lookout Mobile Security, regarding the lack of measurable improvement in the Touch ID sensor between the iPhone 5S and iPhone 6. Rogers mentioned that the technology acquired by Apple from AuthenTek had the capability to provide better security by looking deeper into the finger to detect fake fingerprints, but this feature was not implemented. He emphasized the importance of additional authentication factors like a PIN, password, or pattern to enhance security, suggesting that human decisions or actions in the development process may have contributed to the software's vulnerability [30087]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
hardware, software |
(a) The software failure incident related to hardware:
- The article discusses a vulnerability in the Touch ID fingerprint sensor on the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus, indicating a potential hardware-related issue [30087].
(b) The software failure incident related to software:
- The article mentions flaws in the Touch ID fingerprint sensor's security, indicating software-related weaknesses that could lead to problems [30087]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
malicious |
(a) The software failure incident in this case is related to a malicious objective. The Touch ID readers on the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus were susceptible to a 12-year-old hack that allowed for the spoofing of fingerprints to unlock the devices [30087]. Security researchers demonstrated that fake fingerprints could fool the Touch ID fingerprint sensor, indicating a vulnerability that could potentially be exploited by individuals with malicious intent. Additionally, concerns were raised about the security implications of this vulnerability, especially with the upcoming integration of Touch ID with Apple Pay, which could make the devices targets for criminals looking to exploit the system for financial gain. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions, accidental_decisions |
(a) The software failure incident related to the Touch ID vulnerability on the iPhone 6 and iPhone 5S can be attributed to poor decisions made in the design and implementation of the fingerprint sensor technology. Despite security researchers demonstrating vulnerabilities in the Touch ID system as early as the iPhone 5S, little measurable improvement was made in the sensor between the two devices [30087]. The lack of significant enhancements in the sensor's security features allowed for the same low-budget technique to fake fingerprints and unlock the newer iPhone 6 model, indicating a failure to address known security flaws and make necessary improvements to prevent such vulnerabilities.
(b) The software failure incident can also be linked to accidental decisions or unintended consequences resulting from the design choices made by Apple in implementing the Touch ID technology. While security on the Touch ID fingerprint reader was tightened marginally over time, the fact that fake fingerprints created using a decade-old technique could still readily fool the devices suggests unintended consequences of the design decisions made by Apple [30087]. Additionally, the upcoming integration of Touch ID with Apple Pay raises concerns about potential security risks and criminal exploitation, highlighting the unintended consequences of using the fingerprint sensor as a security touchstone for financial transactions without adequate safeguards in place. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence |
(a) The software failure incident related to development incompetence is evident in the article as it discusses the lack of improvement in the Touch ID fingerprint sensor's security between the iPhone 5S and iPhone 6 despite being vulnerable to a 12-year-old hack. The article highlights that security researcher Marc Rogers was able to use the same low-budget technique to fake fingerprints and unlock the iPhone 6 as he did with the iPhone 5S in 2013, indicating a lack of significant progress in addressing the vulnerability [30087].
(b) The software failure incident related to accidental factors is not explicitly mentioned in the provided article. |
| Duration |
temporary |
The software failure incident discussed in the article is more aligned with a temporary failure rather than a permanent one. The article highlights a specific vulnerability in the Touch ID fingerprint sensor of the iPhone 6 and its predecessor, the iPhone 5S. Security researchers were able to demonstrate a technique to fake fingerprints and bypass the security measures of the Touch ID sensor. This vulnerability is a temporary failure as it is specific to the design and implementation of the Touch ID sensor in these devices, rather than a fundamental flaw affecting all circumstances or systems.
Additionally, the article mentions that the security on the Touch ID fingerprint reader has been tightened only marginally, indicating that the vulnerability is not a permanent failure affecting all circumstances but rather a specific issue with the sensor technology used in these devices [30087]. |
| Behaviour |
omission, value, other |
(a) crash: The articles do not mention any instances of the software crashing.
(b) omission: The software failure incident related to the Touch ID fingerprint sensor on the iPhone 6 and iPhone 5S can be categorized as an omission failure. The failure occurred because the system omitted to perform its intended function of accurately recognizing genuine fingerprints and preventing unauthorized access. The flaw allowed fake fingerprints to fool the Touch ID sensor, leading to the omission of proper authentication [30087].
(c) timing: The articles do not mention any instances of the software performing its intended functions too late or too early.
(d) value: The software failure incident can be categorized as a value failure. The system performed its intended function of fingerprint recognition but did so incorrectly by accepting fake fingerprints as valid, compromising the security feature's value [30087].
(e) byzantine: The articles do not mention any instances of the software behaving with inconsistent responses and interactions.
(f) other: The behavior of the software failure incident can be described as a security vulnerability. Despite attempts to enhance security, the flaw in the Touch ID fingerprint sensor allowed for the bypassing of authentication measures, posing a risk to user data and privacy [30087]. |