3 ms·

Looks like there's a serious security bug in their scope document.

by Retr0id 9mo ago

tptacek 9mo ago
How's that? What do you think the purpose of a bug bounty is? If you think it's "to eradicate all bugs", no, very no.
- JJJollyjim 9mo ago
  This is the place they direct researchers to report bugs. If they don’t want to pay out for MITM, that’s fine, but they should still be taking out-of-scope reports seriously
  - bravetraveler 9mo ago
    +1 Bounty aside, this deserves attention. I wouldn't want to award bounties for MitM either if I made it so easy. They closed the issue as 'out of scope'... with no mention of follow-up (or even the bounty we don't care about). I'm skeptical to say the least. Industry standard has been to ignore MitM or certificates/signatures, not everything.
- Retr0id 9mo ago
  I don't expect an unbounded scope but I do expect it to cover the big scary headline items like RCE. Additionally, this can be exploited without MitM if you combine with e.g. a DNS cache poisoning attack. And they can still fix it even if they're not willing to pay a bounty.
  - tptacek 9mo ago
    DNS poisoning is a MITM vector; in fact, it's the most popular MITM vector.
    - webstrand 9mo ago
      Really? I thought MitM was always intercepting/manipulating traffic from or to the victim.
      - vishnugupta 9mo ago
        What you wrote is the definition of MITM. Op and others are saying DNS poisoning is a popular way of achieving that goal.
        webstrand 9mo ago
        Oh you mean that it's a popular way of initiating the interception part of MitM, got it.
- LoganDark 9mo ago
  A bug bounty should motivate exploitable bugs to be reported so that they can be fixed. IMO, if it refuses to accept certain kinds of bugs that can still be exploited, it's not working properly.
  - tptacek 9mo ago
    A bug bounty directs internal engineering efforts. It can't eradicate bugs; that's not how bugs work.
    - LoganDark 9mo ago
      I wasn't agreeing with your example.
atq2119 9mo ago
If you read it carefully, you'll notice that the blog post misrepresents the AMD response. The blog post title is "AMD won't fix", but the actual response that is quoted in the post doesn't actually say that! It doesn't say anything about will or won't fix, it just says "out of scope", and it's pretty reasonable to interpret this as "out of scope for receiving a bug bounty". It's pretty careless wording on the part of whoever wrote the response and just invites this kind of PR disaster, but on the substance of the vulnerability it doesn't suggest a problem.

Looks like there's a serious security bug in their scope document.

by Retr0id 9mo ago

Looks like there's a serious security bug in their scope document.

tptacek 9mo ago

How's that? What do you think the purpose of a bug bounty is? If you think it's "to eradicate all bugs", no, very no.

JJJollyjim 9mo ago
This is the place they direct researchers to report bugs. If they don’t want to pay out for MITM, that’s fine, but they should still be taking out-of-scope reports seriously
- bravetraveler 9mo ago
  +1 Bounty aside, this deserves attention. I wouldn't want to award bounties for MitM either if I made it so easy. They closed the issue as 'out of scope'... with no mention of follow-up (or even the bounty we don't care about). I'm skeptical to say the least. Industry standard has been to ignore MitM or certificates/signatures, not everything.
Retr0id 9mo ago
I don't expect an unbounded scope but I do expect it to cover the big scary headline items like RCE. Additionally, this can be exploited without MitM if you combine with e.g. a DNS cache poisoning attack. And they can still fix it even if they're not willing to pay a bounty.
- tptacek 9mo ago
  DNS poisoning is a MITM vector; in fact, it's the most popular MITM vector.
  - webstrand 9mo ago
    Really? I thought MitM was always intercepting/manipulating traffic from or to the victim.
    - vishnugupta 9mo ago
      What you wrote is the definition of MITM. Op and others are saying DNS poisoning is a popular way of achieving that goal.
      - webstrand 9mo ago
        Oh you mean that it's a popular way of initiating the interception part of MitM, got it.
LoganDark 9mo ago
A bug bounty should motivate exploitable bugs to be reported so that they can be fixed. IMO, if it refuses to accept certain kinds of bugs that can still be exploited, it's not working properly.
- tptacek 9mo ago
  A bug bounty directs internal engineering efforts. It can't eradicate bugs; that's not how bugs work.
  - LoganDark 9mo ago
    I wasn't agreeing with your example.

atq2119 9mo ago

If you read it carefully, you'll notice that the blog post misrepresents the AMD response. The blog post title is "AMD won't fix", but the actual response that is quoted in the post doesn't actually say that! It doesn't say anything about will or won't fix, it just says "out of scope", and it's pretty reasonable to interpret this as "out of scope for receiving a bug bounty". It's pretty careless wording on the part of whoever wrote the response and just invites this kind of PR disaster, but on the substance of the vulnerability it doesn't suggest a problem.