4 ms·

> Google refused to pay bounties for valid reports because I was a contributor to libxslt Huh?

Cyykratahk 1y ago
I'm guessing Google is avoiding the scenario where a contributor "accidentally" commits code with a bug, then later reports the bug they "found".
- Wowfunhappy 1y ago
  I can understand if it's code the reporting person actually wrote, but if it's just someone else on the project that seems pretty ridiculous.
  - motorest 1y ago
    Not ridiculous. It's a clear conflict of interests, and represents a perverse incentive.
    - baq 1y ago
      And it’s easy to fix - sponsor a contributor. It’d be cheaper than the many meetings that were needed to make the removal decision.
      - motorest 1y ago
        > And it’s easy to fix - sponsor a contributor. It’d be cheaper than the many meetings that were needed to make the removal decision. I don't think that's how it works. I mean, how many problems did you ever fixed by dictating how others should spend their own money? Also, apparently some of these issues exist for over a decade. That alone tells you how serious the problem is, and how urgent it needs fixing.
        baq 1y ago
        I'm just saying they've got a bug bounty program but not a bug prevention bounty program, or even a fix a known bug bounty program. The security team has a budget for the realized risks but predictably not for managing unrealized risk in the open source community which they depend on.
        x0x0 1y ago
        > a bug prevention bounty program Particularly for a dep they've chosen to ship in their browser.
        hmcq6 1y ago
        > Also, apparently some of these issues exist for over a decade. That alone tells you how serious the problem is The "serious problem" is that they've known about bugs for 20 years and not committed resources to fix it. The problem is the money.
        motorest 1y ago
        > The "serious problem" is that they've known about bugs for 20 years and not committed resources to fix it. The problem is the money. Who is "they"? Project maintainers? Project users? You? > The problem is the money. So this is a project that didn't require any funding for decades in order to exist. Explain exactly why you believe money is an issue.
        hmcq6 1y ago
        I misunderstood and thought this was a google sponsored project and not an open bug bounty. Even still, you're responding in a thread about someone who is trying to do legitimate work on this project and google is not honoring the bug bounty system. A problem google could fix if they just assigned someone to manually review the case, it would take like 15 minutes.
  - layer8 1y ago
    People could fix each other’s intentionally introduced bugs and make a living that way. The argument is less convincing when the bugs are a couple years old. There could be an exemption for that, but it’s also more work to verify (Git histories can be fabricated).
    - Wowfunhappy 1y ago
      They could anyway, one person intentionally introduced bugs and the other reports them. The reporter just avoids ever contributing code themself. But doing any of this repeatedly without getting caught seems hard.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
- netsharc 1y ago
  But, what about my minivan? https://devhumor.com/content/uploads/images/October2015/paid-debugging-animation.gif https://devhumor.com/content/uploads/images/October2015/paid...
bryanrasmussen 1y ago
it seems reasonable, if you report bugs in things you contribute to and this was allowed there would be a perverse incentive to inject bugs to have something to report on, furthermore if you are a contributor to a project that is the source of the bugs you have potentially an unfair advantage compared to every other potential reporter of bugs. on edit: because obviously you probably become aware of bugs in your own projects before other people do.
- whizzter 1y ago
  That this would even become a thing for established and widely depended on projects shows how broken our model currently is. In cases like this though, if it involves code from before 2005-2010 the author shouldn't matter since people put very little thought into security back then.
- justinclift 1y ago
  > an unfair advantage compared to every other potential reporter of bugs. Where is the "unfair" in knowing about more bugs to get fixed? "Fair" (or unfair) isn't a concept which is relevant to this.
- tsimionescu 1y ago
  Unfairness is completely irrelevant here, there is 0 reason anyone would want a fair playing field for bug bounties, this isn't a competition. The other arguments do make sense, though.
- alt187 1y ago
  As an end-user, I care very little about "unfair" advantages and a whole lot about actually solving bugs. Plus, pushing intentionally buggy commits in a way that's subtle enough to be noticed, but not so subtle that it seems intentional (once the bug is revealed to be fixed) doesn't sound like the easiest way to make money. Especially on repeat. Wouldn't this be a little suspicious the third time around?
- guappa 1y ago
  What's unreasonable is that they don't sponsor an important library they use.
jimbokun 1y ago
https://devhumor.com/media/dilbert-s-team-writes-a-minivan https://devhumor.com/media/dilbert-s-team-writes-a-minivan

I'm guessing Google is avoiding the scenario where a contributor "accidentally" commits code with a bug, then later reports the bug they "found".

Wowfunhappy 1y ago
I can understand if it's code the reporting person actually wrote, but if it's just someone else on the project that seems pretty ridiculous.
- motorest 1y ago
  Not ridiculous. It's a clear conflict of interests, and represents a perverse incentive.
  - baq 1y ago
    And it’s easy to fix - sponsor a contributor. It’d be cheaper than the many meetings that were needed to make the removal decision.
    - motorest 1y ago
      > And it’s easy to fix - sponsor a contributor. It’d be cheaper than the many meetings that were needed to make the removal decision. I don't think that's how it works. I mean, how many problems did you ever fixed by dictating how others should spend their own money? Also, apparently some of these issues exist for over a decade. That alone tells you how serious the problem is, and how urgent it needs fixing.
      - baq 1y ago
        I'm just saying they've got a bug bounty program but not a bug prevention bounty program, or even a fix a known bug bounty program. The security team has a budget for the realized risks but predictably not for managing unrealized risk in the open source community which they depend on.
        x0x0 1y ago
        > a bug prevention bounty program Particularly for a dep they've chosen to ship in their browser.
      - hmcq6 1y ago
        > Also, apparently some of these issues exist for over a decade. That alone tells you how serious the problem is The "serious problem" is that they've known about bugs for 20 years and not committed resources to fix it. The problem is the money.
        motorest 1y ago
        > The "serious problem" is that they've known about bugs for 20 years and not committed resources to fix it. The problem is the money. Who is "they"? Project maintainers? Project users? You? > The problem is the money. So this is a project that didn't require any funding for decades in order to exist. Explain exactly why you believe money is an issue.
        hmcq6 1y ago
        I misunderstood and thought this was a google sponsored project and not an open bug bounty. Even still, you're responding in a thread about someone who is trying to do legitimate work on this project and google is not honoring the bug bounty system. A problem google could fix if they just assigned someone to manually review the case, it would take like 15 minutes.
- layer8 1y ago
  People could fix each other’s intentionally introduced bugs and make a living that way. The argument is less convincing when the bugs are a couple years old. There could be an exemption for that, but it’s also more work to verify (Git histories can be fabricated).
  - Wowfunhappy 1y ago
    They could anyway, one person intentionally introduced bugs and the other reports them. The reporter just avoids ever contributing code themself. But doing any of this repeatedly without getting caught seems hard.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
netsharc 1y ago
But, what about my minivan? https://devhumor.com/content/uploads/images/October2015/paid-debugging-animation.gif https://devhumor.com/content/uploads/images/October2015/paid...

bryanrasmussen 1y ago

it seems reasonable, if you report bugs in things you contribute to and this was allowed there would be a perverse incentive to inject bugs to have something to report on, furthermore if you are a contributor to a project that is the source of the bugs you have potentially an unfair advantage compared to every other potential reporter of bugs. on edit: because obviously you probably become aware of bugs in your own projects before other people do.

whizzter 1y ago
That this would even become a thing for established and widely depended on projects shows how broken our model currently is. In cases like this though, if it involves code from before 2005-2010 the author shouldn't matter since people put very little thought into security back then.
justinclift 1y ago
> an unfair advantage compared to every other potential reporter of bugs. Where is the "unfair" in knowing about more bugs to get fixed? "Fair" (or unfair) isn't a concept which is relevant to this.
tsimionescu 1y ago
Unfairness is completely irrelevant here, there is 0 reason anyone would want a fair playing field for bug bounties, this isn't a competition. The other arguments do make sense, though.
alt187 1y ago
As an end-user, I care very little about "unfair" advantages and a whole lot about actually solving bugs. Plus, pushing intentionally buggy commits in a way that's subtle enough to be noticed, but not so subtle that it seems intentional (once the bug is revealed to be fixed) doesn't sound like the easiest way to make money. Especially on repeat. Wouldn't this be a little suspicious the third time around?
guappa 1y ago
What's unreasonable is that they don't sponsor an important library they use.

jimbokun 1y ago

https://devhumor.com/media/dilbert-s-team-writes-a-minivan https://devhumor.com/media/dilbert-s-team-writes-a-minivan