The Day I Found an Unsecured FTP — A Responsible Disclosure Story
This responsible disclosure article documents the discovery of an unsecured FTP server during security reconnaissance. **Vulnerability Type**: Unsecured FTP service with information disclosure and potential anonymous access. **Reconnaissance Process**: The researcher used assetfinder for subdomain discovery, DNS lookup to resolve target.example to 203.0.113.45, and nmap to identify open services (FTP, SMTP, SMTP-S, MySQL, POP3, HTTP). **Security Flaw**: The FTP service allowed session establishment with some directory listings visible even without valid credentials, indicating weak configuration. **Technical Details**: The researcher connected via FTP client and observed that while authentication was technically required, the service exposed directory contents and allowed informational commands (ls, dir, pwd) without full authentication - a classic misconfiguration. **Impact**: Exposed directory structures could reveal sensitive filenames, system paths, or data files. The service combination (FTP + MySQL + other services) also indicated poor security posture. **Responsible Approach**: The researcher practiced ethical disclosure by stopping at observation, taking screenshots without documenting specific files, and avoiding destructive actions. They focused on identifying the vulnerability for responsible reporting rather than exploitation. **Mitigation**: Secure FTP configurations should disable anonymous access, restrict directory visibility, implement proper authentication, and ensure least-privilege access controls. Regular security audits of exposed services are essential. #infosec #BugBounty #Cybersecurity #ResponsibleDisclosure #FTPSecurity
https://medium.com/@H4RUK7/the-day-i-found-an-unsecured-ftp-a-responsible-disclosure-story-00caf67ec647?source=rss------bug_bounty-5
“The Day I Found an Unsecured FTP — A Responsible Disclosure Story”

On that day I decided to dig into a specific domain after brushing up on ports, enum, and exploitation. I kicked off recon with subdomain…

Medium
How Bug Bounty Programs are Improving Software Security
This article demonstrates the tangible impact of bug bounty programs on enterprise security through a real-world case study. **Case Study**: A 19-year-old Brazilian computer science student discovered a critical payment system vulnerability allowing unlimited fund transfers between accounts, which had been missed by senior engineers for months. The student earned a $5,000 bounty and provided valuable security insights. **The Power of Diversity**: While the internal security team consisted of 6 engineers, the bug bounty program provided access to thousands of global researchers with diverse perspectives, unique testing methodologies, and persistent curiosity that no single internal team could match. **Cost-Effectiveness**: Traditional penetration testing costs $25,000 for one-time assessments, while their bug bounty program spent $48,000 over two years but prevented potential losses in the millions of dollars. **Global Army of Ethical Hackers**: Bug bounty programs create a distributed network of ethical hackers who continuously probe systems, providing ongoing security testing rather than one-time assessments. **Business Impact**: This approach allowed the company to prevent massive financial losses while building relationships with the security research community and improving their overall security posture. The article highlights how crowdsourced security testing can outperform traditional methods both in effectiveness and cost efficiency. #infosec #BugBounty #Cybersecurity #ResponsibleDisclosure #SecurityTesting
https://osintteam.blog/how-bug-bounty-programs-are-improving-software-security-f1b8efa64d3f?source=rss------bug_bounty-5
How Bug Bounty Programs are Improving Software Security

The Day a College Student Found What Our Team Missed

Medium
The Day I Found an Unsecured FTP — A Responsible Disclosure Story
This responsible disclosure article documents the discovery of an unsecured FTP service during security reconnaissance targeting a specific domain. **Vulnerability Type**: Unsecured FTP service with information disclosure and improper access controls. **Reconnaissance Process**: The researcher used assetfinder for subdomain discovery, identified target.example domain, performed DNS lookup resolving to 203.0.113.45, then conducted nmap service enumeration revealing FTP, SMTP(S), MySQL, POP3, and HTTP services. **Security Flaw**: The FTP service accepted connections and exposed directory listings even without valid authentication credentials, allowing unauthorized information disclosure. **Technical Details**: The researcher connected using basic FTP client commands and observed that while authentication was technically required, the service leaked directory contents and allowed informational commands (ls, dir, pwd) without proper validation. **Responsible Approach**: The researcher practiced ethical disclosure by stopping at observation, taking redacted screenshots, and avoiding destructive exploitation techniques. They focused on documenting the misconfiguration for responsible reporting rather than accessing sensitive data. **Impact**: Exposed directory structures could reveal system architecture, file naming conventions, or sensitive data paths, potentially facilitating further attacks or reconnaissance. **Mitigation**: Proper FTP configuration should disable anonymous access, implement strict authentication requirements, restrict directory visibility, and ensure least-privilege access controls with proper file system permissions. Regular security audits of exposed services are essential. #infosec #BugBounty #Cybersecurity #ResponsibleDisclosure #FTPSecurity #VulnerabilityDisclosure
https://medium.com/@H4RUK7/the-day-i-found-an-unsecured-ftp-a-responsible-disclosure-story-00caf67ec647?source=rss------bug_bounty_tips-5
White Hat Hackers: Crypto's Unsung Digital Guardians

Discover the crucial role of ethical white hat hackers in securing the crypto world. Learn how they find vulnerabilities before criminals do.

investurns.com

#sicherheit geht uns alle an:
Welche Punkte/Regelungen/Belohnungen erwartet ihr in der #responsibledisclosure Policy von einer Seite wie LinuxNews.de? Bin da aktuell etwas planlos…

Hashtags damit wir volle Kanne in der #itsecurity Bubble einschlagen: #cybersecurity #cybersec #opsec #security #databreach #hackerangriff #hacker #itsec #credentialtheft #digitalsafety #digitalesicherheit #threatintelligence

(post describes my experience and does not represent my employer)

LinkedIn post (see also screenshot): https://www.linkedin.com/posts/johannes-greil-189bb813b_cybersecurity-infosec-workexaminer-activity-7386384177107116032-T3ow

I was involved in the mentioned cases and can only warn every penetration tester of bug bounty platforms.

I worked in an official CVE Numbering Authority (CNA) and we were legally threatened multiple times by vendors.

While bug bounty platforms claim to be a "safe harbor" and claim to mediate in difficult situations, in every instance they told us we have to adhere to the policies of the platform and didn't help any further. So, any user of these platforms has a double liability: first, to your country's law, second to the bug bounty platform's policy.

In the case of #HackerOne, they delegate this policy to the vendors:
"Security Teams will publish a program policy [...]. You should always carefully review this program policy prior to submission as they will supersede these [H1's] guidelines in the event of a conflict."
Source: https://www.hackerone.com/terms/disclosure-guidelines

So vendors can create a policy "no one is allowed to publish if we don't agree" and defeat responsible disclosure. In fact, some vendors do exactly that. Bug bounty platforms are paid by vendors and have no incentive to protect the researchers.

➡️ If you submit your vulnerability via email or similar directly to the vendor, then you are not legally bound to the bug bounty program's policy.
➡️ If there is trouble, involve your national CERT, they truly mediate.

Stay safe and warn your pentesting friends.

#PenetrationTesting #CVE #ResponsibleDisclosure

Unfair Experience in a Bug Bounty Program
A researcher discovered a critical sensitive information disclosure vulnerability, allowing access to system files like changelog, webconfig, and other sensitive data. The issue was fixed but the report remains unaccepted after two months, causing frustration and potentially discouraging responsible disclosure. Bug bounty platforms should prioritize fairness, transparency, and proper recognition for researchers to maintain motivation in the cybersecurity community. #BugBounty #CyberSecurity #EthicalHacking #Infosec #ResponsibleDisclosure #BugBountyCommunity
url
https://medium.com/@junedsilavata/unfair-experience-in-a-bug-bounty-program-d00803899e3e?source=rss------bug_bounty-5
🔒 Unfair Experience in a Bug Bounty Program

🔒 Unfair Experience in a Bug Bounty Program Recently, I found a critical sensitive information disclosure in a program listed on a bug bounty platform. I was even able to access and install system …

Medium
@BMDS Hallo, schon mal was von #ModernSolutionGmbH und dem #Hackerparagraphen gehört. Nach dem jetzt auch die letzte Instanz das #BVG den Programmierer hängen lässt nur zur Info. #ResponsibleDisclosure ist vorbei. In Moskau und Penking lachen Sie über uns. Ein Passwort im Klartext in einer Exe ist keine Sicherheitsmaßnahme. Wundert Euch nicht wenn es Demnächst noch viel mehr Schwachstellen im Darknet gibt. Die gehen mit Ihren Quellen besser um. #justmy2cents
Bundesverfassungsgericht lehnt Beschwerde im Fall Modern Solution ab

Das Bundesverfassungsgericht lehnt es ab, mehr Klarheit in den Umgang mit dem Hackerparagrafen 202 StGB zu bringen.

heise online
×

(post describes my experience and does not represent my employer)

LinkedIn post (see also screenshot): https://www.linkedin.com/posts/johannes-greil-189bb813b_cybersecurity-infosec-workexaminer-activity-7386384177107116032-T3ow

I was involved in the mentioned cases and can only warn every penetration tester of bug bounty platforms.

I worked in an official CVE Numbering Authority (CNA) and we were legally threatened multiple times by vendors.

While bug bounty platforms claim to be a "safe harbor" and claim to mediate in difficult situations, in every instance they told us we have to adhere to the policies of the platform and didn't help any further. So, any user of these platforms has a double liability: first, to your country's law, second to the bug bounty platform's policy.

In the case of #HackerOne, they delegate this policy to the vendors:
"Security Teams will publish a program policy [...]. You should always carefully review this program policy prior to submission as they will supersede these [H1's] guidelines in the event of a conflict."
Source: https://www.hackerone.com/terms/disclosure-guidelines

So vendors can create a policy "no one is allowed to publish if we don't agree" and defeat responsible disclosure. In fact, some vendors do exactly that. Bug bounty platforms are paid by vendors and have no incentive to protect the researchers.

➡️ If you submit your vulnerability via email or similar directly to the vendor, then you are not legally bound to the bug bounty program's policy.
➡️ If there is trouble, involve your national CERT, they truly mediate.

Stay safe and warn your pentesting friends.

#PenetrationTesting #CVE #ResponsibleDisclosure