Re: OT Google raises sploit bounties

[Robert Święcki <robert () swiecki net>]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Michal Zalewski <lcamtuf () coredump cx> wrote:
> > His question seemed pretty clear to me. As indicated in the article he
> > linked to, Google apparently raised their bounty/reward. He's asking if
> > something happened to one of their products to cause that, or if they're
> > just paranoid (and maybe expecting something to happen to one of their
> > products).
>
> FWIW, these choices seem weird... for any announcement of that sort,
> it seems more rational to assume any of the following:
>
> 1) It's getting harder to find bugs. Reward amounts correspond to the
> average time needed to locate a vuln.
>
> 2) More reward programs are competing for a fixed pool of skilled
> researchers. Reward amounts are just "bids" for their time.
>
> 3) Incoming reports are surprisingly good. Reward amounts are set to
> recognize high quality work.
>
> 4) The vendor thinks that their product is bulletproof, and uses
> increasing reward amounts as a publicity stunt.
>
> As far as I know, all reward increases for Google VRPs were driven by
> a combination of factors 1 through 3.

Please stop ridiculling conspiracy theories with reasonable arguments
:). No fun.

> I am not sure how "being paranoid" factors in - complex products have
> bugs, browsers doubly so. Similarly, malware seems like a weird reason
> to bump up rewards.
>
> /mz
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/



-- 
Robert Święcki

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/