4 ms·
I'm like 99% sure they intentionally left a few 'low-risk' vulnerabilities which they knew people would uncover (and be rewarded for) to entice the big boys of
by josscrowcroft 14y ago
I'm like 99% sure they intentionally left a few 'low-risk' vulnerabilities which they knew people would uncover (and be rewarded for) to entice the big boys of security probing to roll up their sleeves and get to work looking for the really big ones.
In the long run, they're paying a reasonable amount of money for an army of security consultants to give the service a once-over. Smart!
- dexter313 14y agoWhy would you intentionally leave in potential vulnerabilities, if you hypothetically have the option to release bug free code and boast about it.
- LeafStorm 14y agoYou never have the option of releasing bug-free code. So if they released code with bugs, called it bug-free, and boasted about it, someone would come along, prove them wrong, and embarrass them.
- kristofferR 14y agoThey wouldn't boast about it directly, simply having a bug bounty where no bugs were found/reported would do the boasting for them.
- chris_wot 14y agoThe publicity wouldn't be as effective. However, I can't see them doing this.
- jlgreco 14y agoIs it so implausible that they accidentally left a few low-risk bugs in such a rushed project? It would be pretty damn impressive if all those low-risk bugs were actually intentional.