Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Comments
Google Paid Over $1.5 Million In Bug Bounties In 2014
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
2/5/2015 | 7:10:57 PM
Re: Google so great?
@Marilyn: Indeed.  On the other hand, there is computer science research that indicates that a software project can only have a maximum number of "useful" reviewers -- typically between two and four -- before slamming into a brick wall of diminishing returns.  So, to play devil's advocate with myself, maybe that $1.5 mil. on the front end would have been a waste.

The other problem is that security review is less exciting and interesting than feature review -- a more significant problem that could use a solution.
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
2/3/2015 | 8:47:25 AM
Re: Google so great?
There is definitely more that can always be done in browser application security (and elsewhere). I wonder how far Google's $1.5 million payout  in bug bounties would have gone on the front end  versus the back end of the process...
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
1/31/2015 | 9:30:43 PM
Re: Google so great?
Oh, don't geet me wrong.  I applaud Google's bug bounty program.  Collaboration is key in cybersecurity.  Nonetheless, with the sheer amount of bugs being found and bug bounties being paid out here, it strongly suggests that Google's engineers aren't quite pulling their security weight.
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
1/31/2015 | 12:37:57 PM
Re: Google so great?
I would prefer that the incentive program be the case because not even the Google Engineers can anticipate everything. Having your product tested by a larger group will ensure that more vectors are tested. With technology increasing its capabilities quickly, its not like Google has a finite checklist that they can run through every time. The bug possiblities change with the type of software.
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
1/30/2015 | 10:46:49 PM
Google so great?
Maybe this is just the cynic in me, but at a certain point, with all of these bug bounties being paid out, one has to question the quality of the hiring and/or corporate culture at Google.


Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
I Smell a RAT! New Cybersecurity Threats for the Crypto Industry
David Trepp, Partner, IT Assurance with accounting and advisory firm BPM LLP,  7/9/2021
News
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
Commentary
It's in the Game (but It Shouldn't Be)
Tal Memran, Cybersecurity Expert, CYE,  7/9/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
How Data Breaches Affect the Enterprise
Data breaches continue to cause negative outcomes for companies worldwide. However, many organizations report that major impacts have declined significantly compared with a year ago, suggesting that many have gotten better at containing breach fallout. Download Dark Reading's Report "How Data Breaches Affect the Enterprise" to delve more into this timely topic.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-43790
PUBLISHED: 2021-11-30
Lucet is a native WebAssembly compiler and runtime. There is a bug in the main branch of `lucet-runtime` affecting all versions published to crates.io that allows a use-after-free in an Instance object that could result in memory corruption, data race, or other related issues. This bug was introduce...
CVE-2021-44428
PUBLISHED: 2021-11-29
Pinkie 2.15 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (daemon crash) via a TFTP read (RRQ) request, aka opcode 1.
CVE-2021-44429
PUBLISHED: 2021-11-29
Serva 4.4.0 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (daemon crash) via a TFTP read (RRQ) request, aka opcode 1, a related issue to CVE-2013-0145.
CVE-2021-44427
PUBLISHED: 2021-11-29
An unauthenticated SQL Injection vulnerability in Rosario Student Information System (aka rosariosis) before 8.1.1 allows remote attackers to execute PostgreSQL statements (e.g., SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE) through /Side.php via the syear parameter.
CVE-2021-43783
PUBLISHED: 2021-11-29
@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend is the backend for the default Backstage software templates. In affected versions a malicious actor with write access to a registered scaffolder template is able to manipulate the template in a way that writes files to arbitrary paths on the scaffolder-backend ho...