| Recurring |
one_organization, multiple_organization |
(a) The software failure incident related to the Twitter data breach has happened again at the same organization. The incident involved a massive data dump of over 5.4 million Twitter user records, including personal phone numbers and email addresses, being shared on the dark web. This incident was identified by Chad Loder, the founder of Habitu8, who shared the news on his Twitter account on November 23. Loder's account was suspended shortly after sharing the news, leading to concerns that Twitter was trying to cover up the issue. The breach was believed to have occurred in December 2021 due to a Twitter API vulnerability, and bad actors took advantage of this vulnerability. Twitter confirmed the vulnerability in August and patched it in January 2022, but the incident resurfaced with the recent data dump being shared for free on the dark web in September and November [135399].
(b) The software failure incident related to the Twitter data breach has also happened with other organizations or hacking groups. The initial data dump was posted on a hacking forum with a $30,000 price tag in July. Subsequently, the same hacker who exploited the flaw in December created an extensive database that was then posted online by another hacker known as 'Devil.' This hacker listed 5,485,636 user account records on the dark web in July, and it is believed that two parties purchased the information for less than the $30,000 price tag. Additionally, there were an additional 1.4 million Twitter profiles for suspended users collected using a different API. This suggests that multiple people or hacking groups took advantage of the vulnerability, indicating a broader issue beyond just Twitter [135399]. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident in the articles can be attributed to the design phase. The incident was caused by a Twitter API vulnerability that allowed hackers to submit phone numbers and email addresses into the API to retrieve associated Twitter IDs. This vulnerability was disclosed in the HackerOne bug bounty program, indicating a flaw introduced during the system development phase [135399].
(b) The software failure incident can also be linked to the operation phase. The incident involved bad actors taking advantage of the vulnerability in the Twitter API, which was patched in January 2022. This exploitation occurred due to the operation or misuse of the system by hackers who leveraged the vulnerability to access and collect user data [135399]. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system |
(a) within_system: The software failure incident related to the Twitter data breach can be attributed to factors originating from within the system. The incident involved a vulnerability in the Twitter API that allowed hackers to submit phone numbers and email addresses to retrieve associated Twitter IDs, leading to the exposure of 5.4 million user records [135399]. Twitter confirmed that bad actors exploited this vulnerability, which was disclosed in the HackerOne bug bounty program, but the flaw was patched in January 2022. The breach occurred in December 2021, indicating an internal system vulnerability that was exploited by hackers [135399]. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions, human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident in this case occurred due to non-human actions, specifically a vulnerability in the Twitter API that allowed hackers to exploit and obtain user data. The vulnerability was disclosed in the HackerOne bug bounty program, allowing individuals to submit phone numbers and email addresses into the API to retrieve associated Twitter IDs [135399].
(b) On the other hand, human actions also played a role in this incident. There are concerns that Twitter may be attempting to cover up the issue by removing tweets and suspending the account of Chad Loder, who initially identified the data dump. Some users believe that Elon Musk, the owner of Twitter, banned Loder for exposing the weak security of Twitter. Additionally, there are suspicions that Loder's account suspension was to suppress reporting on right-wing extremists, as he is known as an 'antifascist blogger' [135399]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
hardware, software |
(a) The software failure incident occurring due to hardware:
- The incident involved a massive data breach on Twitter, where more than 5.4 million user records were exposed, including personal phone numbers and email addresses [135399].
- Hackers exploited a Twitter API vulnerability in December 2021, which allowed them to submit phone numbers and email addresses into the API to retrieve associated Twitter IDs [135399].
- The vulnerability was disclosed in the HackerOne bug bounty program, indicating a potential hardware-related issue in the Twitter API implementation [135399].
(b) The software failure incident occurring due to software:
- The software failure incident primarily originated from software vulnerabilities in Twitter's API, which allowed hackers to exploit the system and access user data [135399].
- Twitter confirmed that bad actors took advantage of the vulnerability but patched the flaw in January 2022, indicating a software-related issue that needed to be addressed [135399].
- The incident involved the creation of an extensive database of user records by exploiting the software vulnerability, leading to the subsequent data dump on the dark web [135399]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
malicious |
(a) The software failure incident in this case is malicious. The incident involved a massive data breach on Twitter where more than 5.4 million user records, including personal phone numbers and email addresses, were exposed on the dark web. The breach was identified as a result of hackers exploiting a Twitter API vulnerability in December 2021, allowing them to collect sensitive user information [135399]. The data dump was then shared online by a hacker known as 'Devil,' and the information was offered for free on a hacking forum [135399].
Additionally, the founder of a cyber security awareness company, Chad Loder, who identified the data breach, had his Twitter account suspended shortly after sharing the news about the incident. This led to concerns that Twitter was trying to cover up the issue, with some users suggesting that Elon Musk, the owner of Twitter, banned Loder for exposing the weak security of the platform [135399].
The incident involved intentional actions by hackers to exploit vulnerabilities in Twitter's system and expose sensitive user data, indicating a malicious software failure.
(b) The software failure incident in this case is non-malicious. Twitter confirmed that bad actors took advantage of a vulnerability in their system but patched the flaw in January 2022. At the time of the incident, Twitter reported having 'no evidence' that the vulnerability had been exploited [135399]. This suggests that the initial vulnerability was not intentionally created by Twitter or any other party to harm the system. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions, accidental_decisions |
(a) The intent of the software failure incident related to poor_decisions:
- The software failure incident involving the Twitter data breach was partly due to poor decisions made by Twitter in handling security vulnerabilities. Hackers exploited a Twitter API vulnerability disclosed in the HackerOne bug bounty program, allowing them to access user data such as phone numbers and email addresses [135399].
- Twitter confirmed that bad actors took advantage of the vulnerability but only patched the flaw in January 2022, despite the flaw being disclosed in December 2021. This delay in addressing the vulnerability contributed to the data breach incident [135399].
(b) The intent of the software failure incident related to accidental_decisions:
- The software failure incident also involved accidental decisions or unintended consequences. For example, the suspension of Chad Loder's Twitter account after he reported the data breach raised concerns that Twitter was trying to hide the issue, with some users suggesting Elon Musk was involved in banning Loder for exposing Twitter's weak security [135399].
- The suspension of Loder's account sparked outrage on Twitter, with users believing it was done to suppress reporting on right-wing extremists, indicating unintended consequences of the actions taken by Twitter [135399]. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence |
(a) The software failure incident related to development incompetence is evident in the Twitter data breach incident. The breach occurred due to a Twitter API vulnerability that allowed hackers to submit phone numbers and email addresses into the API to retrieve associated Twitter IDs. This vulnerability was disclosed in the HackerOne bug bounty program, indicating a flaw in the development process that allowed unauthorized access to sensitive user data [135399].
(b) The software failure incident related to accidental factors is seen in the unintentional exposure of 5.4 million Twitter user records on the dark web. The data dump was initially posted on a hacking forum with a price tag, but later it was offered for free. This accidental exposure of user data led to concerns about phishing attacks and the potential misuse of the leaked information [135399]. |
| Duration |
permanent, temporary |
(a) The software failure incident in this case appears to be permanent as it involves a significant data breach where more than 5.4 million Twitter user records, including personal phone numbers and email addresses, were exposed on the dark web [135399]. The incident was not a one-time occurrence but rather a result of a vulnerability in Twitter's API that was exploited by hackers in December 2021. Despite Twitter patching the flaw in January 2022, the data dump continued to circulate, with the records being shared for free on a hacking forum in September and November 2022.
(b) The software failure incident could also be considered temporary in the sense that the initial exploitation of the vulnerability in Twitter's API occurred in December 2021, and the data dump was first posted with a price tag in July. However, the incident resurfaced and gained more attention in November 2022 when the data was shared for free on the dark web, leading to further concerns and discussions about Twitter's security measures and the handling of the breach. |
| Behaviour |
crash, omission, timing, value, other |
(a) crash: The software failure incident in the articles can be categorized as a crash as it resulted in a loss of service and functionality for Twitter users due to the data breach and exposure of user records on the dark web. The incident led to a significant impact on user privacy and security. [135399]
(b) omission: The software failure incident can also be categorized as an omission as the system failed to adequately protect user data, leading to the exposure of personal information such as phone numbers and email addresses. This omission to secure user data resulted in a breach that allowed hackers to access and share sensitive information. [135399]
(c) timing: The timing of the software failure incident can be considered in terms of the system's response to the vulnerability. While the vulnerability was identified in December 2021, it was not fully addressed until January 2022, leaving a window of opportunity for bad actors to exploit the flaw. This delayed response in patching the vulnerability contributed to the data breach incident. [135399]
(d) value: The software failure incident can also be attributed to a failure in the system's performance, resulting in the incorrect handling of user data. The exposure of millions of phone numbers and email addresses indicates a failure in safeguarding sensitive information, leading to potential phishing attacks and security risks for affected users. [135399]
(e) byzantine: The software failure incident does not exhibit characteristics of a byzantine failure, which involves inconsistent responses and interactions within a distributed system. The incident primarily revolves around a data breach and the unauthorized access to user records, rather than issues related to system communication or coordination. [135399]
(f) other: In addition to the identified behaviors, the software failure incident can be categorized as a security breach. The incident involved a breach of user data, exposing sensitive information to unauthorized parties. This breach compromised user privacy and security, highlighting a significant failure in the system's security measures. [135399] |