| Recurring |
one_organization, multiple_organization |
(a) The software failure incident related to the Nest Learning Thermostat draining its battery and causing the device to go offline due to a software bug had happened before within the same organization. The article mentions a similar incident occurring in November with a San Francisco resident named Kent Goldman who had a comparable issue with his Nest thermostat [39456].
(b) The article also highlights that similar incidents of software failures causing significant problems have been observed with other smart devices from different organizations. Examples include issues with wireless fobs for keyless cars making it easier for thieves to break in and Fitbit facing a class-action lawsuit for inaccurately recording wearers' heart rates [39456]. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident with the Nest Learning Thermostat was attributed to a software bug that drained its battery and caused the device to go offline, resulting in homes being left without heat [39456]. The issue was traced back to a software update from December that introduced a bug, which went unnoticed for about two weeks until devices started going offline in January. This highlights a failure in the design phase where the software update led to unintended consequences affecting the operation of the thermostat.
(b) In terms of operation, the incident also involved challenges for users in resolving the issue. Customers had to follow a complex nine-step procedure to manually restart the thermostat, involving detaching the device, charging it with a USB cable, reattaching it to the wall, and pressing a series of buttons [39456]. This operational aspect of dealing with the software failure incident showcases the difficulties faced by users in maintaining and operating the system when such failures occur. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system |
(a) The software failure incident with the Nest Learning Thermostat was primarily within the system. The issue was attributed to a software bug that drained the thermostat's battery, causing it to go offline and fail to maintain the set temperature [39456]. The co-founder of Nest acknowledged that the problem was a result of a bug introduced in a software update from December, which went unnoticed for about two weeks until devices started going offline in January [39456]. The fix for the issue required customers to follow a nine-step procedure to manually restart the thermostat, indicating that the root cause of the failure was within the software system itself [39456]. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions, human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident with the Nest Learning Thermostat was attributed to a software bug that drained its battery and caused the device to go offline, leading to homes being left without heat [39456]. This failure was a result of a bug introduced in a software update from December, which went unnoticed for about two weeks until devices started going offline in January [39456].
(b) Human actions were involved in the software failure incident as the bug that caused the thermostat to malfunction was introduced through a software update. Matt Rogers, the co-founder and vice president for engineering at Nest, acknowledged the issue and took responsibility for the bug that was introduced in the software update [39456]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
software |
(a) The software failure incident reported in the article is attributed to a software bug that drained the battery of the Nest Learning Thermostat, leading to the device going offline and causing homes to become cold [39456]. This issue was specifically linked to a software update from December that introduced a bug, which went unnoticed for about two weeks until devices started going offline in January.
(b) The software failure incident is clearly identified as originating from a software bug introduced in a software update, which caused the Nest Learning Thermostat to malfunction and go offline [39456]. The glitch was acknowledged by the co-founder and vice president for engineering at Nest, attributing the problem to a software update that led to the devices going offline. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
non-malicious |
(a) The software failure incident related to the Nest Learning Thermostat was non-malicious. The incident was attributed to a software bug that drained the thermostat's battery, causing it to go offline and fail to regulate the temperature in users' homes [39456]. The co-founder of Nest, Matt Rogers, acknowledged that the issue stemmed from a bug introduced in a software update from December, which went unnoticed for about two weeks before causing devices to go offline [39456]. The company worked to fix the issue for 99.5% of its customers and provided a manual restart procedure for affected users [39456].
(b) The software failure incident was not malicious but rather a result of unintended consequences of a software update. There is no indication in the article that the software bug was introduced with the intent to harm the system or its users. The incident highlights the risks associated with smart devices and the potential for small glitches to have significant impacts on users' daily lives [39456]. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions |
(a) The software failure incident with the Nest Learning Thermostat was primarily due to poor decisions. The incident was attributed to a software bug that drained the thermostat's battery, causing it to go offline and fail to regulate the temperature in users' homes [39456]. The co-founder of Nest acknowledged that the issue stemmed from a bug introduced in a software update from December, which went unnoticed for about two weeks until devices started going offline in January [39456]. This indicates that the failure was a result of a poor decision in releasing a faulty software update without adequate testing or safeguards in place. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence, accidental |
(a) The software failure incident with the Nest Learning Thermostat was attributed to a software bug that drained its battery and caused the device to go offline, leading to homes being left without heat [39456]. This incident can be categorized under development incompetence as it was caused by a bug introduced in a software update, indicating a lack of professional competence in the development process.
(b) The software failure incident with the Nest Learning Thermostat was described as a glitch that affected an untold number of customers, leading to issues such as homes being left without heat [39456]. This incident can also be considered accidental, as the bug causing the failure was not intentionally introduced but rather occurred inadvertently during the software update process. |
| Duration |
temporary |
The software failure incident related to the Nest Learning Thermostat was temporary. The article mentions that the issue was caused by a software bug introduced in a software update from December, which didn't show up for about two weeks [39456]. This indicates that the failure was not permanent but rather temporary, as it was caused by specific circumstances related to the software update. |
| Behaviour |
crash, omission, value, other |
(a) crash: The software failure incident described in the article is related to a crash. The Nest Learning Thermostat suffered from a mysterious software bug that drained its battery, causing the device to go offline and not perform its intended function of regulating the temperature in users' homes [39456].
(b) omission: The software failure incident can also be categorized as an omission. Due to the software bug, the Nest thermostat omitted to perform its intended function of maintaining the set temperature, leading to a cold house and potential health risks for users, especially those with vulnerable family members [39456].
(c) timing: The timing of the software failure incident is also relevant. The bug introduced in a software update did not immediately manifest but caused devices to go offline after about two weeks, coinciding with plunging temperatures across the country. This delayed manifestation of the issue affected users when they needed the thermostat to function correctly [39456].
(d) value: The software failure incident can be linked to a value failure. The software bug caused the Nest thermostat to perform its intended function of regulating the temperature incorrectly, resulting in the device going offline and failing to maintain the set temperature, leading to discomfort and potential health hazards for users [39456].
(e) byzantine: The software failure incident does not align with a byzantine failure. The issue described in the article is more focused on a specific software bug that affected the functionality of the Nest thermostat, rather than exhibiting inconsistent responses or interactions [39456].
(f) other: The behavior of the software failure incident can be described as a critical failure with significant real-world consequences. The failure of the Nest thermostat due to the software bug led to users experiencing discomfort, potential health risks, and concerns about property damage, highlighting the impact of software failures on everyday life [39456]. |