| Recurring |
unknown |
The articles do not provide information about the software failure incident happening again at either the same organization (Vodafone Australia) or at multiple organizations. Therefore, the information related to the recurrence of the incident is unknown. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
unknown |
The articles do not provide specific information related to software failure incidents occurring due to the development phases (design or operation). |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system |
(a) The software failure incident in this case falls under the within_system category. The failure was a result of an employee from within Vodafone accessing a journalist's phone records in an attempt to uncover sources for stories [51626]. This action was directly related to internal factors within the system, such as security breaches and privacy violations within Vodafone's IT systems. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident in this case was primarily due to non-human actions, specifically a Vodafone employee hacking a journalist's phone records in an attempt to uncover her sources for stories [51626]. This unauthorized access to private information was a breach of security protocols and privacy regulations, leading to a significant failure in the system.
(b) Human actions also played a significant role in this software failure incident. The Vodafone employee's decision to access the journalist's phone records and the subsequent actions taken by Vodafone executives to potentially cover up the extent of security breaches and mislead authorities about the incident were all human actions that contributed to the failure [51626]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
software |
(a) The software failure incident in the reported article does not seem to be related to hardware issues. The incident primarily revolves around a Vodafone employee hacking a journalist's phone records in an attempt to uncover her sources for stories, which points to a breach in software security rather than hardware failure [51626].
(b) The software failure incident is directly linked to software issues. The breach occurred when a Vodafone employee accessed the journalist's phone records to uncover company whistleblowers. This indicates a failure in the software security system, specifically the Siebel data system, which was vulnerable to hacking and allowed unauthorized access to sensitive customer information [51626]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
malicious, non-malicious |
(a) The software failure incident in this case was malicious. An employee at Vodafone Australia hacked a journalist's phone records in an attempt to uncover her sources for stories. The employee accessed the journalist's phone call and text message records after she reported on security lapses in Vodafone's system. This act was intentional and aimed at harming the journalist and potentially covering up security breaches within the company. The incident involved deliberate actions by an individual with the intent to harm the system and invade privacy [51626].
(b) The software failure incident was also non-malicious in the sense that the vulnerabilities in Vodafone's Siebel data system were exposed by the journalist in the public interest. The journalist's reports highlighted serious security flaws that allowed criminal groups to access customers' private information. The incident led to investigations by regulatory authorities, indicating that the failure was not caused by intentional actions to harm the system but rather by inherent weaknesses in the system that were exposed unintentionally [51626]. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions |
The software failure incident reported in the article does not directly relate to a technical software failure but rather involves a case of unauthorized access to a journalist's phone records by a Vodafone employee. The incident was driven by poor decisions and intentional actions rather than accidental decisions related to software failure. The employee's decision to access the journalist's phone records was a deliberate attempt to uncover sources for stories, as indicated by internal emails suggesting a cover-up of security breaches and misleading authorities about privacy breaches [51626]. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence, accidental |
(a) The software failure incident in the Vodafone Australia case can be attributed to development incompetence. An employee hacked a journalist's phone records in an attempt to uncover her sources for stories, indicating a lack of professional competence in handling sensitive customer information [51626]. Additionally, internal emails suggested that the company deliberately misled authorities about systemic privacy breaches, further highlighting issues related to professional competence within the organization.
(b) The incident can also be categorized as accidental, as the unauthorized access to the journalist's phone records was not a planned action but rather an accidental breach of privacy that occurred as a result of the employee's actions [51626]. |
| Duration |
temporary |
The software failure incident reported in the articles is more related to a temporary failure rather than a permanent one. The incident involved a Vodafone employee hacking a journalist's phone records in an attempt to uncover her sources for stories. This action was a result of specific circumstances, such as the journalist's investigative reporting on security lapses in Vodafone's system and the subsequent attempt to identify whistleblowers. The incident was not a permanent failure introduced by all circumstances but rather a temporary failure triggered by certain specific events [51626]. |
| Behaviour |
other |
(a) crash: The incident involving Vodafone Australia's employee hacking a journalist's phone records did not result in a system crash where the system loses state and does not perform any of its intended functions. The employee accessed the journalist's phone records to uncover sources, indicating that the system was still operational and able to retrieve the desired information [51626].
(b) omission: The software failure incident does not align with a failure due to omission, where the system fails to perform its intended functions at an instance(s). In this case, the employee actively accessed the journalist's phone records, indicating a deliberate action rather than a failure to perform a function [51626].
(c) timing: The incident does not relate to a timing failure where the system performs its intended functions but does so too late or too early. The employee accessed the journalist's phone records in response to the stories published, indicating a specific timing for the action rather than a timing failure of the system itself [51626].
(d) value: The software failure incident does not correspond to a failure due to the system performing its intended functions incorrectly. The employee accessed the journalist's phone records with the intention of uncovering sources, which aligns with the employee's goal rather than a failure of the system to provide accurate information [51626].
(e) byzantine: The incident does not exhibit a byzantine failure where the system behaves erroneously with inconsistent responses and interactions. The employee's actions were targeted towards a specific goal of uncovering sources rather than exhibiting inconsistent behavior within the system itself [51626].
(f) other: The behavior of the software failure incident can be categorized as a deliberate breach of privacy and misuse of system access by an employee rather than a technical failure within the system itself. The incident involved intentional unauthorized access to private information, indicating a violation of privacy policies and ethical standards rather than a typical software failure [51626]. |