| Recurring |
one_organization |
(a) The software failure incident having happened again at one_organization:
In the case of Intel's Sandy Bridge chipset flaw, it is mentioned that Intel was criticized in the 1990s after it corrected but did not disclose a flaw in one of its Pentium processors [Article 3741]. This indicates a past incident within the same organization where a software flaw was not disclosed promptly.
(b) The software failure incident having happened again at multiple_organization:
There is no specific mention in the provided articles about a similar incident happening at other organizations or with their products and services. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident related to the design phase is evident in the flaw discovered in Intel's Sandy Bridge chipset. The article mentions that the issue was a result of a "circuit design oversight" in the Cougar Point chipset, which is the companion chip to the Sandy Bridge processor [3924]. This design flaw led to a communication problem between the chipset and SATA devices, impacting ports 2 through 5 [3924]. Intel had to correct the design issue and manufacture a new version of the chipset to resolve the problem [3924].
(b) The software failure incident related to the operation phase is highlighted by the fact that the defect in Intel's chip could have caused communication issues between computers and their hard disk drives or DVD drives, potentially leading to system failures [3741]. The flaw was discovered after manufacturers stress-tested the chips with high voltage and temperatures, indicating that operational conditions could trigger the failure [3741]. Intel mentioned that the problem could have caused a low and continuing failure rate over the life of the systems if left undiscovered [3741]. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system |
(a) within_system: The software failure incident related to the flaw in Intel's Sandy Bridge chipset was due to a boundary within the system. The flaw was specifically in the Cougar Point chipset, which is a companion chip to the Sandy Bridge processor. The issue was related to how the Cougar Point chipset communicated with SATA devices, affecting ports 2 through 5. Intel discovered the issue during testing of consumer-oriented products, indicating that the problem originated within the system itself [3924].
(b) outside_system: The software failure incident was not due to contributing factors originating from outside the system. The flaw in the Sandy Bridge chipset was a result of a design issue within the chipset itself, specifically related to how it communicated with SATA devices. The issue was discovered internally by Intel after customers reported problems, and the company took action to address the flaw by manufacturing a new version of the chipset [3924]. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions, human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident occurring due to non-human actions:
- The software failure incident in this case was due to a flaw in Intel's Sandy Bridge chipset, specifically the Cougar Point chipset, which was a circuit design oversight [3924].
- The issue was discovered after customers started reporting problems, and Intel's stress tests revealed a failure to access certain SATA ports over time [3924].
- The flaw affected the communication between the Cougar Point chipset and SATA devices, such as hard disk drives and optical drives [3924].
- Intel had to stop shipments of the faulty chips and began manufacturing a new version of the chipset to resolve the issue [3741].
(b) The software failure incident occurring due to human actions:
- The design flaw in the Sandy Bridge chipset was a result of a circuit design oversight, indicating a mistake made during the design and manufacturing process [3924].
- Intel faced criticism for not disclosing a flaw in one of its Pentium processors in the past, which could be seen as a human error in handling defects [3741].
- Intel engineers identified the defect after manufacturers stress-tested the chips with high voltage and temperatures, suggesting a potential oversight during the testing phase [3741]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
hardware |
(a) The software failure incident occurring due to hardware:
- The software failure incident reported in the articles is related to a flaw in Intel's Sandy Bridge chipset, specifically the Cougar Point chipset, which is a hardware component [3924, 3741].
- The flaw in the chipset affects how it communicates with SATA devices, indicating a hardware-related issue [3924].
- Intel has corrected the design issue in the chipset, characterized as a "circuit design oversight," and has begun manufacturing a new version of the chipset to resolve the issue [3924].
- The defect in the chip was discovered after more than 100,000 of the faulty chips were shipped to computer manufacturers, indicating a hardware-related issue [3741].
(b) The software failure incident occurring due to software:
- The software failure incident is not directly attributed to software issues but rather to a hardware flaw in the chipset [3924, 3741].
- The flaw in the chipset affects how it communicates with SATA devices, indicating a hardware-related issue rather than a software-related issue [3924].
- Intel's engineers identified the defect in the chipset after stress-testing the chips with high voltage and temperatures, suggesting a hardware-related issue [3741]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
non-malicious |
(a) The software failure incident related to the flaw in Intel's Sandy Bridge chipset was non-malicious. The issue was a result of a circuit design oversight in the Cougar Point chipset, which caused a communication problem with SATA devices [3924, 3741]. The flaw was discovered during testing, and Intel took proactive measures to address the issue by manufacturing a new version of the chipset to resolve it [3924]. The incident was not caused by any malicious intent but rather by a design flaw in the hardware component.
(b) The software failure incident was not malicious but rather a result of a defect in the chipset that was discovered after the chips were shipped to computer manufacturers [3741]. The defect could have led to communication failures between the central processor and other computer components, affecting the functionality of the system [3741]. Intel took steps to rectify the issue by stopping shipments of the faulty chips and producing a new version of the chipset [3741]. The incident was a non-malicious failure caused by a design flaw in the hardware component. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions, accidental_decisions |
The software failure incident related to the Intel Sandy Bridge chipset flaw can be attributed to both poor decisions and accidental decisions:
(a) poor_decisions: The flaw in the Sandy Bridge chipset was due to a "circuit design oversight" characterized by Intel as a poor decision in the design process [3924].
(b) accidental_decisions: The flaw in the chipset was discovered after Intel shipped more than 100,000 of the chips to computer manufacturers, indicating that the defect was an unintended consequence of the design and manufacturing process [3741]. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence |
(a) The software failure incident occurring due to development incompetence:
- The flaw in the Sandy Bridge chipset was due to a "circuit design oversight" [3924].
- Intel faced a design flaw in one of its chips, impacting its credibility during a major product launch [3741].
(b) The software failure incident occurring accidentally:
- The flaw in the Sandy Bridge chipset was characterized as a "circuit design oversight" [3924].
- Intel discovered the defect in the chip after it had shipped more than 100,000 of them to computer manufacturers, indicating it was not intentional [3741]. |
| Duration |
temporary |
The software failure incident related to the Sandy Bridge chipset flaw reported in the news articles can be categorized as a temporary failure. The flaw in the Cougar Point chipset was discovered early in the rollout of the Sandy Bridge processor, affecting SATA ports 2 through 5. Intel took immediate action to address the issue by stopping shipments, correcting the design flaw, and manufacturing a new version of the chipset to resolve the problem [3924, 3741]. The flaw was detected through stress testing, indicating that it was due to specific circumstances rather than a permanent issue inherent in the design. Additionally, the impact on consumers was relatively small, with only a "few weeks delay in the ramp of Sandy Bridge" expected [3924]. |
| Behaviour |
crash, omission, timing, value, other |
(a) crash:
- The flaw in the Sandy Bridge chipset caused a failure to access certain SATA ports over time, indicating a potential crash in the system's functionality [3924].
- Intel's defect in one of its chips used in personal computers with the Sandy Bridge line of processors led to a halt in shipments and production of a new version, suggesting a crash in the affected systems [3741].
(b) omission:
- The flaw in the Sandy Bridge chipset affected the communication with SATA devices, potentially leading to an omission of performing the intended functions related to data access [3924].
- Intel's defect in the chip could have caused computers to be unable to communicate with their hard disk drives or DVD drives, indicating an omission in performing essential functions [3741].
(c) timing:
- The issue with the Sandy Bridge chipset was discovered early in the rollout of the new processor, suggesting that the timing of the failure was caught before it impacted a large number of systems [3924].
- Intel's engineers identified the defect in the chip last week after stress-testing, indicating a timing issue where the problem was detected relatively early in the process [3741].
(d) value:
- The flaw in the Sandy Bridge chipset affected the communication with SATA devices, potentially leading to incorrect performance in data access functions [3924].
- The defect in Intel's chip could have prevented computers from communicating with essential hardware components, resulting in incorrect performance of the system's functions [3741].
(e) byzantine:
- The articles do not provide information suggesting a byzantine behavior in the software failure incident.
(f) other:
- The flaw in the Sandy Bridge chipset was related to a design issue in the Cougar Point chipset, not the main processor, indicating a specific type of behavior that does not fit into the crash, omission, timing, value, or byzantine categories [3924].
- Intel's defect in the chip led to a halt in shipments and production of a new version, impacting the credibility of the company during a major product launch, which could be considered as another type of behavior in the software failure incident [3741]. |