3 ms·
He wrote that the 50k was for 10 different bug bounties so splitting it up according to those bounties wouldn’t necessarily be “intentionally breaking up transf
by CogitoCogito 4y ago
He wrote that the 50k was for 10 different bug bounties so splitting it up according to those bounties wouldn’t necessarily be “intentionally breaking up transfers to get around limits”.
- O__________O 4y agoPoint was not to give specific advice or understand the specifics of the author’s situation, but to say, it’s their responsibility to sort it out, not HackerOne. He obviously would rather spend time trying to make others be responsible for fixing his issues, than just figure it out himself. HackerOne more than happy to send him the funds to a financial institution that’s legal to do so that already fits within their pay out offerings.
- CogitoCogito 4y agoHackerOne has _no_ obligation to try to sort this out? Frankly I think it is largely their responsibility. They agreed to pay him. They should be trying to meet that agreement. Instead they are apparently ignoring his communications (which of course is not required by any legislation). Frankly the way they're acting is disgraceful. I don't understand how you can defend them.