Incident: Smart Light Bulb Vulnerability Allows Hackers to Spread Malicious Code

Published Date: 2016-11-03

Postmortem Analysis
Timeline 1. The software failure incident involving the Philips Hue smart light bulb and the wireless flaw was reported in the article published on 2016-11-03 [49740]. 2. Steps to estimate the timeline: Step 1: The article mentions that the researchers were going to make their findings public on Thursday, which indicates that the incident likely happened shortly before the publication date. Step 2: The article was published on 2016-11-03. Step 3: Based on the information in the article, the software failure incident likely occurred around November 2016.
System 1. Philips Hue smart light bulb [49740]
Responsible Organization 1. Hackers were responsible for causing the software failure incident by exploiting a flaw in the wireless technology of the Philips Hue smart light bulb [49740].
Impacted Organization 1. Philips - The software failure incident impacted Philips as the vulnerability was found in their Philips Hue smart light bulb [49740].
Software Causes 1. The software cause of the failure incident was a flaw in the wireless technology used in smart home devices like the Philips Hue smart light bulb, which allowed hackers to take control of the light bulbs [49740]. 2. The failure incident was also caused by a major bug in the way the wireless communications system for the lights had been executed, making it possible to "yank" already installed lamps from their existing networks [49740]. 3. Additionally, the failure incident was caused by a side channel attack used by the researchers to purloin the key that Philips uses to authenticate new software, demonstrating the difficulty in getting security right even for a large company using standard cryptographic techniques [49740].
Non-software Causes 1. Weak passwords on some products of a Chinese wireless camera manufacturer were partly to blame for the attack [49740].
Impacts 1. The software failure incident allowed hackers to potentially take control of Philips Hue smart light bulbs, leading to a compromise of the devices [49740]. 2. The compromised devices could be used as a springboard for various malicious activities such as launching attacks, stealing information, sending spam, or triggering epileptic seizures through strobe patterns [49740]. 3. The incident highlighted the vulnerability of Internet of Things (IoT) devices to cyber attacks, showcasing the risks associated with having numerous internet-connected devices in close proximity [49740]. 4. The researchers demonstrated that a single compromised light bulb could infect a large number of nearby lights within minutes, emphasizing the rapid spread of malware in such scenarios [49740]. 5. Philips released a patch to fix the vulnerability, but the incident underscored the challenges in ensuring security in IoT devices and the difficulty in implementing effective security measures even for major products [49740].
Preventions 1. Implementing strong password policies for internet-connected devices to prevent unauthorized access [49740]. 2. Conducting thorough security assessments and audits of wireless communication protocols like ZigBee to identify and address potential vulnerabilities [49740]. 3. Regularly updating software and firmware of smart home devices to patch known security flaws and bugs [49740]. 4. Enhancing encryption methods and authentication processes to prevent unauthorized access and manipulation of devices [49740].
Fixes 1. Philips fixed the vulnerability in a patch issued on Oct. 4 and recommended that customers install it through a smartphone application [49740].
References 1. Researchers at the Weizmann Institute of Science near Tel Aviv and Dalhousie University in Halifax, Canada [49740] 2. Adi Shamir, a cryptographer and one of the authors of the report [49740] 3. Chinese wireless camera manufacturer attributing weak passwords on some products to the attack [49740] 4. Philips, the company behind the Philips Hue smart light bulb, which was the focus of the vulnerability [49740]

Software Taxonomy of Faults

Category Option Rationale
Recurring one_organization, multiple_organization (a) The software failure incident related to the Philips Hue smart light bulb and the wireless flaw discovered by researchers at the Weizmann Institute of Science near Tel Aviv and Dalhousie University in Halifax, Canada, is an example of a software vulnerability within the same organization's product [49740]. The researchers found a flaw in the wireless technology used in smart home devices like the Philips Hue light bulb, which could allow hackers to take control of the light bulbs. Philips addressed this vulnerability by issuing a patch to fix the issue. (b) The incident also highlights the broader risk associated with the Internet of Things (IoT) and the potential for similar attacks to occur with other internet-connected devices from various manufacturers. The article mentions a recent attack on Dyn, a New Hampshire company, where hackers briefly denied access to parts of the internet by overwhelming servers with traffic from compromised IoT devices. This incident demonstrates that the risk of IoT devices being used in large-scale attacks is not limited to a single organization but extends to multiple organizations and their products [49740].
Phase (Design/Operation) design, operation (a) The software failure incident related to the design phase is evident in the article. Researchers uncovered a flaw in the wireless technology used in smart home devices like the Philips Hue smart light bulb. They found a wireless flaw that could allow hackers to take control of the light bulbs, potentially compromising thousands of internet-connected devices in close proximity [49740]. (b) The software failure incident related to the operation phase is also highlighted in the article. Hackers could exploit the compromised devices to create programs for attacks like the one that hit Dyn, steal information, send spam, or even trigger epileptic seizures by manipulating the LED lights. The compromised devices could be used as a springboard for various malicious activities due to the vulnerability in the ZigBee standard and the flaw in the Philips Hue smart light bulb [49740].
Boundary (Internal/External) within_system (a) within_system: The software failure incident described in the article is primarily due to contributing factors that originate from within the system. Researchers uncovered a flaw in the wireless technology used in smart home devices like the Philips Hue smart light bulb, allowing hackers to take control of the light bulbs [49740]. The flaw in the wireless communication system for the lights and the side channel attack used to steal the authentication key were internal system vulnerabilities that led to the software failure incident.
Nature (Human/Non-human) non-human_actions, human_actions (a) The software failure incident in the article is related to non-human actions, specifically a flaw in the wireless technology used in smart home devices like the Philips Hue smart light bulb. Researchers uncovered a wireless flaw in the ZigBee standard, a radio protocol widely used in home consumer devices, which could allow hackers to take control of the light bulbs and spread malicious code through the air [49740]. (b) The software failure incident also involves human actions as the researchers needed to overcome technical challenges by finding a major bug in the wireless communications system for the lights and using a "side channel" attack to steal the key used for authentication of new software. Despite the vulnerability being fixed by Philips through a patch, the incident highlights the difficulty in ensuring security even when using standard cryptographic techniques [49740].
Dimension (Hardware/Software) hardware, software (a) The software failure incident related to hardware can be seen in the article where researchers found a flaw in a wireless technology used in smart home devices like the Philips Hue smart light bulb. They discovered a "major bug" in the way the wireless communications system for the lights had been executed, allowing them to manipulate the lamps from their existing networks [49740]. (b) The software failure incident related to software can be observed in the same article where researchers used a "side channel" attack to steal the key used by Philips to authenticate new software for the smart light bulbs. This attack exploited a flaw in the software's authentication process, highlighting a weakness in the software design [49740].
Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) malicious (a) The software failure incident described in the articles is malicious in nature. The incident involved researchers uncovering a flaw in the wireless technology of smart home devices like the Philips Hue smart light bulb, which could allow hackers to take control of the light bulbs and spread malicious code through the air [49740]. The researchers demonstrated how compromising a single light bulb could infect a large number of nearby lights within minutes, potentially spreading the attack to thousands of devices in close proximity [49740]. Additionally, the incident highlighted the potential risks associated with the Internet of Things and how hackers could exploit vulnerabilities in connected devices to launch large-scale attacks, as seen in the case of the Dyn attack where hackers overwhelmed servers with a flood of traffic from compromised devices [49740]. (b) The software failure incident is non-malicious in the sense that the vulnerability in the ZigBee wireless standard used in the Philips Hue smart light bulb was not intentionally designed to harm the system. The flaw in the wireless communication system for the lights and the side channel attack used by the researchers to obtain the authentication key were technical issues that were exploited to demonstrate the potential risks of the vulnerability [49740]. Philips addressed the vulnerability by issuing a patch to fix the flaw, indicating a non-malicious intent to secure the system and protect customers from potential attacks [49740].
Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) poor_decisions (a) The software failure incident related to the Philips Hue smart light bulb was primarily due to poor decisions made in the design and implementation of the wireless communications system. Researchers uncovered a flaw in the wireless technology used in smart home devices like the Philips Hue light bulb, which allowed hackers to take control of the light bulbs [49740]. The researchers
Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) development_incompetence (a) The software failure incident in the article can be attributed to development incompetence. The researchers uncovered a flaw in the wireless technology used in smart home devices like the Philips Hue smart light bulb. They found a major bug in the way the wireless communications system for the lights had been executed, which allowed them to take control of the light bulbs. Additionally, they used a side channel attack to steal the key used for authentication of new software, demonstrating the difficulty in getting security right even for a large company using standard cryptographic techniques [49740]. (b) The incident does not seem to be accidental as the flaws and vulnerabilities in the wireless technology were deliberately uncovered by the researchers, indicating a lack of professional competence in the development of the system rather than accidental introduction of contributing factors.
Duration permanent (a) The software failure incident described in the article is more of a permanent nature. The flaw in the wireless technology used in smart home devices like the Philips Hue smart light bulb allowed hackers to take control of the light bulbs, potentially leading to the spread of malicious code among thousands or even hundreds of thousands of internet-connected devices [49740]. Additionally, the researchers found a "major bug" in the wireless communications system for the lights, which made it possible to disrupt the existing networks of the lamps [49740]. These vulnerabilities and flaws in the software could have long-lasting implications if not addressed promptly and effectively.
Behaviour crash, other (a) crash: The article mentions a vulnerability in the wireless technology used in smart home devices like the Philips Hue smart light bulb that could allow hackers to take control of the light bulbs. The researchers found a flaw in the wireless technology that could potentially allow hackers to spread malicious code through the air, compromising the devices' security [49740]. (b) omission: The software failure incident described in the article does not specifically mention a failure due to the system omitting to perform its intended functions at an instance(s). (c) timing: The article does not describe a failure due to the system performing its intended functions correctly, but too late or too early. (d) value: The article does not mention a failure due to the system performing its intended functions incorrectly. (e) byzantine: The software failure incident described in the article does not specifically mention a failure due to the system behaving erroneously with inconsistent responses and interactions. (f) other: The other behavior described in the article is a vulnerability in the wireless technology that could potentially allow hackers to take control of the Philips Hue smart light bulbs and spread malicious code through the air, compromising the security of the devices [49740].

IoT System Layer

Layer Option Rationale
Perception network_communication The software failure incident discussed in the article is related to the network communication layer of the cyber physical system. The failure was due to contributing factors introduced by a wireless flaw in the ZigBee standard used in smart home devices like the Philips Hue smart light bulb. The researchers uncovered a flaw in the wireless technology that allowed hackers to take control of the light bulbs, spread malicious code through the air, and create a computer worm to infect internet-connected devices [49740]. The failure was not directly related to sensor, actuator, processing unit, or embedded software errors, but rather to vulnerabilities in the network communication protocol.
Communication link_level The software failure incident described in the article is related to the communication layer of the cyber physical system that failed at the link_level. The failure was due to contributing factors introduced by the wireless physical layer, specifically a flaw in the ZigBee wireless technology used in smart home devices like the Philips Hue smart light bulb. The researchers uncovered a wireless flaw in the ZigBee standard that allowed hackers to take control of the light bulbs and spread malicious code through the air [49740].
Application TRUE The software failure incident described in the article [49740] was related to the application layer of the cyber physical system. The failure was due to a flaw in the wireless technology used in smart home devices like the Philips Hue smart light bulb. Researchers uncovered a wireless flaw that could allow hackers to take control of the light bulbs, demonstrating a vulnerability in the application layer of the system [49740]. The flaw allowed hackers to spread malicious code through the air and compromise the security of the devices, showcasing a failure related to bugs and security vulnerabilities at the application layer of the cyber physical system.

Other Details

Category Option Rationale
Consequence non-human, theoretical_consequence, unknown (a) unknown (b) unknown (c) unknown (d) The software failure incident described in the articles did not directly result in any reported property damage or financial loss to individuals. However, the potential consequences discussed included the ability for hackers to take control of internet-connected devices like smart light bulbs, which could lead to various malicious activities such as stealing information or triggering epileptic seizures [49740]. (e) unknown (f) The software failure incident involved a flaw in the wireless technology of smart home devices like the Philips Hue smart light bulb, which could allow hackers to take control of these devices [49740]. (g) unknown (h) The potential consequences discussed in the articles included the ability for hackers to spread malicious code through the air by compromising internet-connected devices, potentially leading to the spread of malware among devices and the creation of computer worms to infect more devices [49740]. (i) unknown
Domain information (a) The failed system in the article was related to the industry of information. The incident involved a flaw in a wireless technology used in smart home devices like lights, switches, locks, and thermostats, which are components of the "smart home" concept [49740]. The compromised system allowed hackers to take control of the Philips Hue smart light bulbs, demonstrating a vulnerability in the technology that could potentially be exploited for malicious purposes [49740]. (b) The transportation industry was not directly mentioned in the article. (c) The incident did not pertain to the natural resources industry. (d) The sales industry was not specifically involved in the software failure incident. (e) The construction industry was not mentioned in relation to the software failure incident. (f) The incident did not relate to the manufacturing industry. (g) The utilities industry, which includes power, gas, steam, water, and sewage services, was not the focus of the software failure incident. (h) The finance industry, which involves manipulating and moving money for profit, was not directly impacted by the software failure incident. (i) The incident did not directly affect the knowledge industry, which includes education, research, and space exploration. (j) The health industry, encompassing healthcare, health insurance, and food industries, was not specifically mentioned in the context of the software failure incident. (k) The entertainment industry, covering arts, sports, hospitality, and tourism, was not directly related to the software failure incident. (l) The government sector, which includes politics, defense, justice, taxes, and public services, was not the primary focus of the software failure incident. (m) The software failure incident was not explicitly linked to any other industry beyond the information technology sector discussed in the article.

Sources

Back to List