| Recurring |
one_organization, multiple_organization |
(a) The software failure incident related to Quantum Insert has happened again at the NSA and its partner spy agency, Britain's GCHQ. This hacking technique has been used by them since 2005 to hack into high-value systems and implant malware [35059].
(b) The software failure incident related to Quantum Insert has also happened at other organizations, such as in the case of the controversial GCHQ/NSA operation against employees of the Belgian telecom Belgacom and workers at OPEC, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries [35059]. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The article discusses a sophisticated hacking technique known as Quantum Insert, which has been used by the NSA and GCHQ to hack into high-value systems since 2005. This technique involves hijacking a browser as it tries to access web pages and forcing it to visit a malicious web page instead of the intended page. The attackers can then download malware onto the target's machine from the rogue web page. The development and use of such hacking techniques by intelligence agencies like the NSA and GCHQ can be seen as a failure in the design phase, as these techniques exploit vulnerabilities in systems that were not adequately protected against such attacks [35059].
(b) The operation phase failure can be attributed to the successful deployment of Quantum Insert attacks against targets. These attacks require precise positioning and action on the part of rogue servers to ensure they redirect and serve up a malicious page faster than legitimate servers can deliver a page to the browser. The success rate per shot for these attacks was reported to be "greater than 50 percent." The operation phase failure lies in the fact that these attacks were highly successful in implanting malware on computers around the world, all while remaining undetected. This indicates a failure in the operation phase, as the attacks were able to bypass detection mechanisms and successfully compromise target machines [35059]. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system, outside_system |
(a) within_system: The software failure incident described in the article is related to a hacking technique known as Quantum Insert, which involves exploiting vulnerabilities within the system to hijack browsers and force them to visit malicious web pages. The NSA and GCHQ used this technique to implant malware on target machines by intercepting browser traffic and redirecting users to rogue web pages [35059].
(b) outside_system: The software failure incident also involves factors originating from outside the system, such as the use of fast-acting servers near the target's machine and special high-speed servers placed at key points around the internet by the spy agencies. These external factors play a crucial role in the success of the Quantum Insert attacks by ensuring that the rogue servers can redirect and serve up malicious pages faster than legitimate servers [35059]. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions, human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident related to non-human actions in the provided article is the Quantum Insert hacking technique used by the NSA and GCHQ. This technique involves hijacking a browser's attempt to access web pages and forcing it to visit a malicious web page, allowing the attackers to download malware onto the target's machine surreptitiously. The Quantum Insert attack is carried out by fast-acting servers near the target's machine, intercepting browser traffic swiftly to deliver the malicious web page before the legitimate page can arrive. This failure is a result of the sophisticated and stealthy nature of the hacking technique, rather than direct human actions [35059].
(b) The software failure incident related to human actions in the provided article involves the actions of the NSA and GCHQ in conducting the Quantum Insert attacks. These agencies identified specific engineers and system administrators, mapped out digital footprints, set up rogue pages impersonating legitimate profiles, and used packet-capturing tools to spot footprints or markers that identified the online traffic of their targets. The success of the Quantum Insert attacks relied on precise positioning and action on the part of the rogue servers to ensure they could redirect and serve up a malicious page faster than legitimate servers. The human actions of planning, executing, and coordinating these attacks contributed to the software failure incident [35059]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
hardware, software |
(a) The software failure incident related to hardware: The article discusses a sophisticated hacking technique known as Quantum Insert, which involves the NSA and GCHQ using fast-acting servers near a target's machine to intercept browser traffic swiftly and deliver a malicious web page before the legitimate page can arrive. This technique requires the use of rogue systems like FoxAcid servers and special high-speed servers known as "shooters" placed at key points around the internet [35059].
(b) The software failure incident related to software: The article mentions that security researchers at Fox-IT in the Netherlands found a way to detect Quantum Insert attacks using common intrusion detection tools such as Snort, Bro, and Suricata. They have also developed custom patches for Snort to help detect these attacks, indicating that the software was vulnerable to exploitation by the Quantum Insert technique [35059]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
malicious |
(a) The objective of the software failure incident was malicious, as it involved a hacking technique known as Quantum Insert used by the NSA and Britain's GCHQ to hack into high-value systems and implant malware [35059]. The attackers hijacked browsers to visit malicious web pages, allowing them to surreptitiously download malware onto the target's machines. This technique was used in various operations, including against employees of the Belgian telecom Belgacom and workers at OPEC [35059].
(b) The incident was not non-malicious; it was a deliberate and sophisticated hacking operation aimed at compromising systems and implanting malware for espionage purposes [35059]. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions |
(a) The intent of the software failure incident related to poor decisions can be seen in the Quantum Insert hacking technique used by the NSA and GCHQ. This technique involves intercepting browser traffic and forcing the browser to visit a malicious web page instead of the intended page, allowing the attackers to download malware onto the target's machine. The decision to use such a sophisticated and stealthy technique for hacking high-value systems can be considered a poor decision in terms of ethical considerations and potential consequences [35059].
(b) The intent of the software failure incident related to accidental decisions can be seen in the detection method developed by security researchers at Fox-IT. They discovered a way to detect Quantum Insert attacks by analyzing the first content-carrying packets that come back to a browser in response to its GET request. This method was developed through controlled testing and analysis of the attack packets, indicating an unintentional discovery rather than a planned outcome [35059]. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
unknown |
(a) The software failure incident related to development incompetence is not applicable in this case as the incident described in the article is not attributed to lack of professional competence by humans or the development organization.
(b) The software failure incident described in the article is related to an intentional hacking technique known as Quantum Insert, which is not accidental but a deliberate action by the NSA and GCHQ to hack into high-value systems and implant malware [35059]. |
| Duration |
permanent |
The software failure incident described in the article is more of a permanent nature rather than temporary. The incident involving the Quantum Insert hacking technique used by the NSA and GCHQ has been ongoing since at least 2005 and has been used in various operations over the years, including against employees of Belgacom and workers at OPEC [35059]. The technique involves sophisticated and stealthy methods to hijack browsers and implant malware, with the attackers being able to surreptitiously download malware onto the target's machine from a rogue web page. The success rate of the attacks was noted to be "greater than 50 percent" for certain pages [35059]. Additionally, security researchers have developed detection methods and patches for intrusion detection tools to identify and prevent Quantum Insert attacks, indicating that the issue is ongoing and requires continuous monitoring and mitigation efforts [35059]. |
| Behaviour |
other |
(a) crash: The articles do not mention any software failure incident related to a crash where the system loses state and does not perform any of its intended functions.
(b) omission: The software failure incident described in the articles does not involve the system omitting to perform its intended functions at an instance(s).
(c) timing: The software failure incident does not involve the system performing its intended functions correctly but too late or too early.
(d) value: The software failure incident does not involve the system performing its intended functions incorrectly.
(e) byzantine: The software failure incident described in the articles does not involve the system behaving erroneously with inconsistent responses and interactions.
(f) other: The software failure incident described in the articles involves a sophisticated hacking technique known as Quantum Insert, where the attackers hijack a browser to visit a malicious web page instead of the intended page, allowing them to surreptitiously download malware onto the target's machine. This behavior falls under the "other" category as it is not specifically described in options (a) to (e) [35059]. |