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.

Database Security
Authentication
Mobile
Privacy
Compliance
Careers and People
Identity & Access Management
Security Monitoring
Advanced Threats
Insider Threats
Vulnerability Management
Comments
Google Paid Over $1.5 Million In Bug Bounties In 2014
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Joe Stanganelli
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
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
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
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
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
The 10 Most Impactful Types of Vulnerabilities for Enterprises Today
Managing system vulnerabilities is one of the old est - and most frustrating - security challenges that enterprise defenders face. Every software application and hardware device ships with intrinsic flaws - flaws that, if critical enough, attackers can exploit from anywhere in the world. It's crucial that defenders take stock of what areas of the tech stack have the most emerging, and critical, vulnerabilities they must manage. It's not just zero day vulnerabilities. Consider that CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog lists vulnerabilitlies in widely used applications that are "actively exploited," and most of them are flaws that were discovered several years ago and have been fixed. There are also emerging vulnerabilities in 5G networks, cloud infrastructure, Edge applications, and firmwares to consider.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2023-1142
PUBLISHED: 2023-03-27
In Delta Electronics InfraSuite Device Master versions prior to 1.0.5, an attacker could use URL decoding to retrieve system files, credentials, and bypass authentication resulting in privilege escalation.
CVE-2023-1143
PUBLISHED: 2023-03-27
In Delta Electronics InfraSuite Device Master versions prior to 1.0.5, an attacker could use Lua scripts, which could allow an attacker to remotely execute arbitrary code.
CVE-2023-1144
PUBLISHED: 2023-03-27
Delta Electronics InfraSuite Device Master versions prior to 1.0.5 contains an improper access control vulnerability in which an attacker can use the Device-Gateway service and bypass authorization, which could result in privilege escalation.
CVE-2023-1145
PUBLISHED: 2023-03-27
Delta Electronics InfraSuite Device Master versions prior to 1.0.5 are affected by a deserialization vulnerability targeting the Device-DataCollect service, which could allow deserialization of requests prior to authentication, resulting in remote code execution.
CVE-2023-1655
PUBLISHED: 2023-03-27
Heap-based Buffer Overflow in GitHub repository gpac/gpac prior to 2.4.0.