| Recurring |
one_organization |
(a) The software failure incident having happened again at one_organization:
The software failure incident involving the theft of $2.7 million in Bitcoin occurred again at Silk Road 2.0, which is the successor to the original Silk Road that was shut down by the FBI [24249, 24497]. Hackers exploited the same 'transaction malleability' vulnerability that had caused temporary transfer shutdowns at other Bitcoin exchanges like BitStamp and Mt. Gox [24249, 24497]. The incident at Silk Road 2.0 indicates a recurring issue within the organization's software security measures.
(b) The software failure incident having happened again at multiple_organization:
The articles do not provide information about the software failure incident happening again at multiple organizations. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident related to the design phase can be seen in the articles. Silk Road 2.0 was hacked by attackers who exploited the 'transaction malleability' flaw in Bitcoin, which had also caused temporary transfer shutdowns at other exchanges like BitStamp and Mt. Gox [24249, 24497]. This flaw in the design of the Bitcoin system allowed hackers to repeatedly withdraw bitcoins from Silk Road's accounts until they were empty, leading to the theft of $2.7 million.
(b) The software failure incident related to the operation phase is evident in the articles as well. The administrator of Silk Road 2.0, Defcon, mentioned that a vendor exploited a bug during a vulnerable moment in the site's relaunch process, initiating and hiding a flood of transactions until the accounts were emptied [24497]. This indicates a failure in the operation of the site during the relaunch process, where lax security procedures and little separation between vendor wallets and escrow holdings contributed to the theft. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system |
(a) within_system: The software failure incident reported in the news articles was primarily due to contributing factors that originated from within the system. The hackers exploited a flaw in Bitcoin, known as 'transaction malleability,' to steal $2.7 million worth of Bitcoin from Silk Road 2.0 [24249, 24497]. This flaw allowed the attackers to repeatedly withdraw bitcoins from the site's accounts until they were empty, leading to the significant theft. Additionally, the site's relaunch process had unusually lax security procedures, with little separation between vendor wallets and escrow holdings, which contributed to the vulnerability exploited by the hackers [24497].
(b) outside_system: There is no explicit mention in the articles of contributing factors originating from outside the system that led to the software failure incident. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions, human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident in the Silk Road 2.0 hack was primarily due to a non-human action, specifically the exploitation of the 'transaction malleability' flaw in Bitcoin. This flaw allowed hackers to manipulate transactions and steal bitcoins from the site's accounts [24249, 24497].
(b) However, there were also human actions involved in the incident. The site's administrator, Defcon, was criticized for not implementing proper security measures and for the lax security procedures during the site's relaunch process, which contributed to the vulnerability that was exploited by the hackers [24249, 24497]. Additionally, there were suspicions and accusations within the community that the site's administrators may have been involved in faking the hack and stealing the money themselves, highlighting the potential for human involvement in the failure incident [24249]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
software |
(a) The software failure incident related to hardware:
- The incident reported in the articles is primarily related to a software failure due to a Bitcoin glitch that allowed hackers to steal $2.7 million from Silk Road's customers [24249, 24497].
- The hack was made possible by exploiting the 'transaction malleability' in Bitcoin, which is a software-related vulnerability rather than a hardware issue [24497].
(b) The software failure incident related to software:
- The software failure incident in the articles is directly attributed to a flaw in the Bitcoin system that allowed hackers to exploit the vulnerability and steal funds from Silk Road [24249, 24497].
- The hack was facilitated by a software glitch that enabled the repeated withdrawal of bitcoins from Silk Road's accounts until they were emptied, indicating a software-related issue [24249]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
malicious |
(a) The software failure incident in the articles is malicious. The Silk Road 2.0 website was hacked by attackers who exploited the 'transaction malleability' flaw in Bitcoin, resulting in the theft of nearly $2.7 million in bitcoins [24249, 24497]. The hackers took advantage of this vulnerability to repeatedly withdraw bitcoins from the site's accounts until they were empty, indicating a deliberate act to steal funds from the platform. The administrator of Silk Road 2.0 called on the hackers to return the stolen bitcoins, highlighting the malicious nature of the incident.
(b) The software failure incident in the articles is non-malicious. The vulnerability exploited by the hackers in the Silk Road 2.0 hack was the same 'transaction malleability' flaw that had caused temporary transfer shutdowns at other bitcoin exchanges like BitStamp and Mt. Gox [24249, 24497]. This indicates that the flaw was a pre-existing technical issue in the Bitcoin system rather than a deliberate introduction by malicious actors. The incident was a result of a software glitch or vulnerability that was not intentionally created to harm the system. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions |
(a) The intent of the software failure incident:
- The software failure incident related to the Silk Road 2.0 hack was primarily due to poor decisions made during the relaunch process. The report mentioned that the relaunch process required unusually lax security procedures by the site, with little separation between vendor wallets and escrow holdings, which contributed to the vulnerability exploited by the hackers [Article 24497].
- Additionally, the administrator of Silk Road 2.0, known as Defcon, admitted to failing as a leader and being devastated by the discoveries related to the hack. Defcon acknowledged that the website should have followed the approach of other major Bitcoin exchanges and halted withdrawals due to the Bitcoin system flaw, indicating poor decisions were made in handling the security of the platform [Article 24249]. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence |
(a) The software failure incident in the articles can be attributed to development incompetence. The hack on Silk Road 2.0, resulting in the theft of $2.7 million in Bitcoin, was due to hackers exploiting a flaw in Bitcoin known as 'transaction malleability' [24249, 24497]. The administrator of Silk Road 2.0, Defcon, admitted that the hackers took advantage of this vulnerability, which had also caused temporary transfer shutdowns at other Bitcoin exchanges like BitStamp and Mt. Gox [24249, 24497]. This indicates a failure in the development and implementation of secure systems to protect against known vulnerabilities in the software.
(b) The software failure incident can also be considered accidental to some extent. The hack on Silk Road 2.0 was not intentional on the part of the website administrators but rather a result of hackers exploiting a known flaw in the Bitcoin system [24249, 24497]. The hackers were able to manipulate transactions and steal the funds due to this vulnerability, which was not deliberately introduced by the administrators but was a weakness in the underlying technology being used. |
| Duration |
permanent |
(a) The software failure incident in the articles was permanent. The hackers exploited a flaw in Bitcoin, known as 'transaction malleability,' to steal $2.7 million worth of Bitcoin from Silk Road 2.0 [24249, 24497]. The flaw allowed the attackers to repeatedly withdraw bitcoins from the site's accounts until they were empty, resulting in the loss of funds that are now gone forever. The incident led to a loss of confidence in Bitcoin and significant financial repercussions for the users of Silk Road 2.0. |
| Behaviour |
crash, byzantine |
(a) crash: The software failure incident described in the articles can be categorized as a crash. The Silk Road 2.0 website was hacked, resulting in attackers exploiting a vulnerability in the Bitcoin system, which allowed them to steal $2.7 million worth of bitcoins from the site's escrow accounts. As a result of this attack, Silk Road 2.0 temporarily shut down, indicating a failure due to the system losing its state and not being able to perform its intended functions [24249, 24497].
(e) byzantine: The behavior of the software failure incident can also be classified as byzantine. The hackers exploited the 'transaction malleability' vulnerability, which had also affected other major exchanges like Bitstamp and Mt. Gox. This exploitation led to the repeated withdrawal of bitcoins from Silk Road 2.0's accounts until they were emptied, showcasing inconsistent responses and interactions within the system [24249, 24497]. |