Presentation Material
Abstract
In this talk, I will share my journey from a novice to a seasoned hunter. I will explore how I used to report low-impact, informative bugs when I first started, and how I progressively improved by learning from the community, embracing failures/duplicates, and incorporating feedback from triage teams and clients. This journey of continuous learning and adaptation led me from reporting low vulnerabilities to effectively chaining and converting them into critical impacts.
This session is designed for both aspiring and experienced bug bounty hunters. By reflecting on a decade of lessons learned, I will aim to provide valuable takeaways that can help others navigate their own paths in bug bounty hunting and enhance their skills.
Additionally, one Synack triage team member will join me on this talk to help differentiate triage thinking from bug bounty hunters’ thinking, providing valuable insights into the collaborative process of vulnerability reporting to acceptance.
AI Generated Summary
The talk examined a decade of evolution in bug bounty programs from the dual perspectives of a triage team lead and a successful full-time researcher. It emphasized that the field is fundamentally egalitarian, valuing demonstrable skill and valid findings over formal credentials or reputation.
Key findings highlighted that the primary cause for report rejection is insufficient demonstration of real-world impact. Triagers require a clear, compelling narrative of malicious use case to justify engineering effort and associated costs. Duplicate reports are an inherent part of the process, often resulting from shared codebases across products or automated scanning. The quality and detail of the report itself are critical; verbose, step-by-step reproduction instructions and a “scary story” explaining business risk significantly increase acceptance chances.
Practical techniques presented included focusing on a specific technology or asset class (e.g., SQL databases, mobile applications) to develop deep expertise and intuition, rather than broad, shallow scanning. Researchers were advised to strategically select targets with less competition for initial success and to treat rejections as direct feedback for skill improvement. The role of bounty platforms was clarified as impartial intermediaries that protect researchers and provide consolidated target lists, not as entities withholding payment.
The overarching takeaway is that sustainable success in bug bounties requires a mindset shift from hunting for any vulnerability to hunting for impactful vulnerabilities, supported by meticulous research and communication. Persistence, continuous learning from the community and from rejections, and specializing in a niche are more reliable paths to a viable career than chasing immediate high payouts.