24 ms·
I understand your point, but saying that Google has no incentive isn't accurate. There's always an incentive not to pay for bug reports, simply because it resul
by nwellnhof 5y ago
I understand your point, but saying that Google has no incentive isn't accurate. There's always an incentive not to pay for bug reports, simply because it results in a short-term gain. Whether it's a good decision in the long run is another question.
It's more helpful to analyze the situation from a game-theoretic standpoint. Bug bounty programs are a typical example of a cooperative game. If someone reports a security issue, they start the game by cooperating. Google can then choose to cooperate by paying a bounty or they can defect by refusing a reward. Like in the classical prisoner's dilemma, both parties can typically maximize their rewards by choosing to cooperate.
My case is a bit special. While I don't know the exact reasons why Google chose not to reward me, it's possible that they thought I would continue to cooperate even after they defected. But like most rational players, I chose to stop cooperating, which ultimately leads to the worst possible outcome.
- FreshFries 5y agoBeing the one who decides to pay or not pay bounties in our bug bounty program: trust me when I say that the internal discussion, fact finding, classification, quality control, release planning & the rest exceeds your bounty by a factor 10. Same goes for the dialogs with unhappy hunters who like 'proof' for the arguments that a bug / vulnerability is not there. There is literally no financial incentive for me at all to not reward, au contraire actually.