| ▲ | sdfhbdf 3 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||
> awarded $5000 It's a little perplexing. Of course it's always a controversial topic since it's difficult to value an exploit, but whenever we read about these online, which probably goes through some survivorship bias, they seem pretty low. On https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/msrc/bounty it seems the top is $100,000 or $250,000 depending which program this counts under. What does HN think? Why would it be only $5000? | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | omoikane an hour ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Every HN post regarding security exploits inevitably results in some comment saying the bounty is too low. I find it helpful to read previous comments by tptacek regarding bug bounties and market values: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... This one probably has the best summary: | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | muglug 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
As I understand it, bug bounty awards are a rough proxy for "would nation-state actors be able to exploit this for operational purposes without getting caught". Zero-click iPhone exploits that affect the current OS and also previous ones are worth hundreds of thousands. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | TeMPOraL an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
I think HN, like a lot of people in this industry, have strongly skewed perception of the actual importance of these bugs. You could view the bounty prices as market evidence that most of this is rightfully treated as nothingburgers. I.e. the alternative to paying $5000 to some random person for this class of vulnerability research is not risking a trillion dollar hack the next day - it's just risking shmaybe some kerfuffle down the line, followed by fixing it through normal triage process. The bounty program is as much marketing as security, and $5000 is probably about the right price for marginal effort into sustaining the "we are treating security seriously" message. In a way, the very existence of those bug bounty programs in large companies is evidence they don't see a reason to treat vulnerabilities seriously enough to proactively find and fix them in-house. If security vulnerabilities would be anywhere serious as most commenters on-line seem to think, companies would pay hundreds of thousands for serious vulnerabilities, just to save a day before they get hit by them - on top of spending millions in-house to try and stay ahead of the attackers. But they don't. Because most exploits are inconsequential and/or aren't being exploited much. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | giancarlostoro an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
What's worse is the alternative is winding up like Aaron Swartz... (all he did was scrape PDFs for mostly public funded / tax funded papers) Which is even worse, I think I'd be glad to receive $20 for Starbucks instead of being legally chased for showing them they messed up. There should really be laws for protecting security researchers who produce 0 harm and divulge / share a vulnerability with a service provider. I'd rather the floor be getting no money AND not going to jail or being sued. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | bix6 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
$5k is a literal penny for Microsoft. Give the kid $100k. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Perz1val 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Microsoft's bounty program and payouts are known to be pathetic, see that nightmare eclipse situation | |||||||||||||||||