Slashdot Mirror
The Tech Failings of Hawaii's Missile Alert
Over the weekend, Hawaii incorrectly warned citizens of a missile attack via their phones. According to The Washington Post, the error was a result of a staffer picking the wrong option -- missile alert instead of test missile alert -- from a drop down software menu. Hawaiian officials say they have already changed protocols to avoid a repeat of the scenario. The report goes on to add: Part of what worsened the situation Saturday was that there was no system in place at the state emergency agency for correcting the error, HEMA (Hawaii Emergency Management Agency) spokesman Richard Rapoza said. The state agency had standing permission through FEMA to use civil warning systems to send out the missile alert -- but not to send out a subsequent false alarm alert, he said. Though the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency posted a follow-up tweet at 8:20 a.m. saying there was "NO missile threat," it wouldn't be until 8:45 a.m. that a subsequent cellphone alert was sent telling people to stand down. Motherboard notes that new regulations require telecom companies to offer a testing system for local and state alert originators, but because of lobbying by Verizon and CTIA, this specific regulation does not go into effect until March 2019.
In a piece, The Atlantic argues that the 90-character messages sent by the system aren't suited to the way we use our devices.
In a piece, The Atlantic argues that the 90-character messages sent by the system aren't suited to the way we use our devices.
You need a mechanical physical switch with a switch guard. The very fact that an actual alert would be triggered by a menu item, indicates a completely incompetent design. I seldom call for people's jobs, but I'll make an exception in this case..
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
The alert went through as chosen and selected. It worked as designed.
What failed was the operator not paying attention to their work.
Seriously, contact all the major TV and radio stations in the area first. The expectation that everyone should get critical information from "social" media is a joke.
Seriously, contact all the major TV and radio stations in the area first.
Which should take some time, unlike sending a tweet on an account already owned by the emergency center.
Also, the contacting of TV and Radio station might be hampered by people actually attempting to follow the instruction of the previous wrong alert.
Though most TV and Radio crew might wonder how come there's an alert about a missile attack on their *phones* while, at the same time they do not receive a full list of information that they have to broadcast immediately to the population while interrupting the normal programming.
So, while the HEMA guys are heading for the simplest thing to do to communicate information (blasting it on accounts that they actually own, like Twitter), the TV and Radio station should be the one trying to contact HEMA to understand why they weren't asked to broadcast any emergency information (it might have been an error like in this case. Or in the alternative case of an actual live attack, the general population might be missing critical information that the Radio should have been broadcasting and that got stuck somewhere in the process).
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
This is actually a test OF the prod system. You can have a totally separate system for testing, but you do need to test the production system to make sure that some system hasn't broke, bird eaten through a wire, or service credential expired. Data Centers test transfer switches once a month in production. Across the midwest, they test tornado sirens once a month.
You're right. If I had mod points, I'd give you a bump. Your insight that the blessing here outweighs the cost is one I haven't seen given enough attention. Fresh eyes will be looking at how the process should work to prevent mistakes and that's a good thing. Likely they'll find other areas that need improvement.
Using a system intended for conveniently notifying the public with information to instead notify the public of an emergency is a dangerous mistake, one of which they're now aware. Finding out that the public doesn't know how to respond is priceless information that they have now. The guy who clicked the wrong menu option may not deserve a medal, but put him on the committee determining how to fix the system and plan responses. Redemption is a strong motivator.
Now the public knows that they need a response plan for such an emergency. Having public pressure to get prepared is perhaps the greatest thing that could happen. People trying to get the public prepared would have been frustrated before this, but now they'll have the public on their side. That's the kind of thing that makes budgets happen.
B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
While it was certainly a bone headed mistake, it was one what was easily possible for someone in a hurry. As this fellow was just wrapping up his shift, he was clearly trying to get everything done in time.
It this was indeed the setup the mistake was idiotic programming and software design. The end user screwing it up was entirely predictable and probably inevitable. The problem occurred when the system was designed. If a system can fail because of the design, it almost certainly will fail sooner or later.
Part of my day job is to write work instructions and design procedures. When something goes wrong the first question I have to ask is "what did I do wrong", NOT "who screwed up"? 90+% of the time the problem was unclear/wrong/misleading instructions, a badly designed process, or some other problem where the person tasked with carrying out the instructions was set up to fail. In other words, my fault. We as engineers tend to take too little responsibility for our own failures and blame user error when in fact the error was a badly designed program or procedure. We tend to think we are the smartest people in the room and while that may be true sometimes it doesn't mean we are perfect.