| Recurring |
one_organization |
(a) The software failure incident related to Secret allowing friends to trace posts back to users had happened before within the same organization. Secret CEO David Byttow mentioned that a similar issue was patched back in May, indicating a recurrence of the software vulnerability within the organization [29204].
(b) There is no specific mention in the provided article about the software failure incident happening at other organizations or with their products and services. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident in the article can be attributed to the design phase. The incident occurred due to a flaw in Secret's system design that allowed hackers to exploit the way the app imported contacts and labeled posts from friends. The hack involved manipulating the system by filling the contact list with fake accounts to track a specific person's posts, highlighting a vulnerability in the design of the system [29204].
(b) Additionally, the software failure incident can also be linked to the operation phase. The misuse of the system by hackers to trace posts back to individuals demonstrates a failure in the operational security of the app. The exploit took advantage of how the system operated in labeling posts from friends, indicating a weakness in the operational procedures of Secret [29204]. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system, outside_system |
(a) within_system: The software failure incident in the Secret app was due to a vulnerability within the system itself. Hackers at Rhino Security Labs were able to exploit a flaw in the app's design related to how it labeled posts from friends. By manipulating the contact list and controlling posts from fake accounts, they could easily track posts from a specific target, highlighting an issue within the system's logic and security measures [29204].
(b) outside_system: The software failure incident also involved factors originating from outside the system. The hackers utilized a method of poisoning the data on the outside (fake contacts) to manipulate the system's behavior when importing and labeling friends' posts. This external manipulation of data allowed them to bypass the app's intended security measures, showcasing how external factors can impact the functioning of a software system [29204]. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident in this case occurred due to non-human actions. The failure was attributed to a hack by hackers at Rhino Security Labs who found a way to dupe Secret's system by exploiting a loophole in the app's functionality. They were able to manipulate the system by filling the phone's contact list with fake people and only one real contact, allowing them to track posts from the real contact despite efforts by Secret to prevent such tracking [29204]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
software |
(a) The software failure incident in the article was not attributed to hardware issues. Instead, it was related to a software vulnerability that allowed hackers to manipulate the system by exploiting a flaw in Secret's software. The hackers at Rhino Security Labs were able to dupe Secret's system by using a specific method involving fake contacts and a real target contact, highlighting a software vulnerability rather than a hardware issue [29204]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
malicious |
(a) The software failure incident in this case was malicious. Hackers at Rhino Security Labs discovered a way to dupe Secret's system by exploiting a vulnerability that allowed them to trace posts back to users, potentially compromising the anonymity of the platform [29204]. The hackers intentionally manipulated the system to identify users and their posts, demonstrating malicious intent to harm the system's core functionality. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
unknown |
(a) The intent of the software failure incident was not due to poor decisions but rather due to a hack by hackers at Rhino Security Labs who found a way to dupe Secret's system by exploiting a loophole in the app's functionality. The hackers manipulated the system by filling the phone's contact list with fake people and only one real contact to track posts from specific individuals, bypassing the intended security measures of the app [29204]. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence, accidental |
(a) The software failure incident in the article can be attributed to development incompetence. The hackers at Rhino Security Labs were able to exploit a vulnerability in Secret's system by manipulating the way the app imported contacts and labeled posts. This manipulation allowed them to trace posts back to specific individuals, compromising the anonymity feature of the app. The CEO of Secret acknowledged that the hack was due to a software update and mentioned that a similar issue had been patched earlier. This indicates a failure in ensuring the security and anonymity features of the app during the development process, highlighting a lack of professional competence in addressing potential vulnerabilities [29204].
(b) The software failure incident can also be considered accidental to some extent. The CEO of Secret mentioned that the hack was not 100% accurate and only possible for a short time, indicating that the vulnerability was not intentionally introduced but rather a result of unforeseen consequences of a software update. Additionally, the fix for the issue was implemented promptly after the security researchers notified the company, suggesting that the incident was not a deliberate act but rather a mistake that needed immediate attention to rectify [29204]. |
| Duration |
temporary |
The software failure incident described in the article was temporary. Secret's CEO, David Byttow, mentioned that the hack was only possible for a short time and that they issued a fix immediately after being notified by security researchers. Byttow also stated that a similar issue was patched back in May, indicating that the problem was not permanent and was addressed promptly [29204]. |
| Behaviour |
value, other |
(a) crash: The software failure incident in the article does not involve a crash where the system loses state and stops performing its intended functions.
(b) omission: The software failure incident in the article does not involve an omission where the system fails to perform its intended functions at an instance(s).
(c) timing: The software failure incident in the article does not involve a timing issue where the system performs its intended functions too late or too early.
(d) value: The software failure incident in the article involves a failure related to the system performing its intended functions incorrectly. The hack allowed users to manipulate the system to trace posts back to specific individuals, which was not the intended behavior of the app [29204].
(e) byzantine: The software failure incident in the article does not involve a byzantine failure where the system behaves erroneously with inconsistent responses and interactions.
(f) other: The software failure incident in the article involves a behavior where the system's security was compromised due to a loophole in the app's functionality, allowing users to bypass the intended anonymity feature and trace posts back to specific individuals [29204]. |