[taatof]

> From a distance, white hat "vulnerability disclosures" start to look like a protection racket.

A pretty big distance.

If a mobster threatens to burn down a building unless you buy their "insurance", that's a protection racket.

If someone finds a major fire code violation and threatens to tell the fire marshal about it unless they fix it within a certain timeframe, that's not a protection racket, even though there's technically a threat involved. If the building owner is a dick about it, then next time that person will probably just go directly to the fire marshal.

[sdwr]

If the reporter is trying to get paid for not reporting, that's blackmail. If the blackmail is organized, it's a racket.

Plus, if the attack surface is huge and/or fractal, you will never run out of exploits. The more you pay people to find them, the harder they look...

[taatof]

> If the reporter is trying to get paid for not reporting, that's blackmail.

That's not what happened here and isn't usually what happens, though? The reporter usually gives a timeline for fixing the bug before reporting externally, and often extends that deadline if it's clear the Company is working on it. This is separate from bug bounty payments.

> The more you pay people to find them, the harder they look...

Yeah... that's the point...

[lodovic]

People will look for bugs regardless, better incentivize them to report to you first