Microsoft Expands Bug Bounty Program to Include All Vulnerabilities by Default

Key Takeaways

• Microsoft’s bug bounty program has expanded its scope to include more types of vulnerabilities and testing methods
• The program prohibits certain activities, such as using or accessing credentials that aren’t one’s own, launching phishing attacks, and performing denial-of-service testing
• The expanded scope aims to reduce gray-area arguments and friction with researchers, and to foster stronger trust in the research community
• The approach has both pros and cons, including the potential for fewer disqualifications and more early-stage findings, but also relies heavily on researcher goodwill and internal judgment calls

Introduction to Microsoft’s Bug Bounty Program
Microsoft’s bug bounty program has undergone significant changes, widening its scope to include more types of vulnerabilities and testing methods. This move is expected to have a significant impact on the research community and the way vulnerabilities are reported and addressed. The program’s rules of engagement prohibit certain activities, such as using or accessing credentials that aren’t one’s own, launching phishing attacks against Microsoft employees, performing denial-of-service testing, or interacting with storage accounts not included in a user’s own subscription. These restrictions are in place to ensure that researchers operate within a safe and responsible framework.

The Pros and Cons of the Approach
The widening of scope in Microsoft’s bug bounty program is not entirely new, as other cloud service providers, financial institutions, and SaaS companies have published similar scope language. However, Microsoft’s approach is distinct in that it provides clearer guidelines and better signaling to researchers. This can result in fewer gray-area arguments and the "is this in scope?" back-and-forth questioning that can expend time and create friction with researchers. According to Info-Tech’s Avakian, this approach can foster stronger trust in the research community and encourage researchers to submit early-stage findings. On the other hand, the approach still relies heavily on researcher goodwill and internal judgment calls, which can be a limitation.

Implications for the Research Community
The expanded scope of Microsoft’s bug bounty program has significant implications for the research community. By providing clearer guidelines and better signaling, researchers are more likely to submit early-stage findings, which can be beneficial for defenders. This can also lead to fewer disqualifications and more consistent reporting of vulnerabilities. Additionally, the program’s emphasis on responsible disclosure and safe testing practices can help to reduce the risk of accidental damage or disruption to Microsoft’s services. However, the program’s reliance on researcher goodwill and internal judgment calls can create uncertainty and inconsistency in the reporting and addressing of vulnerabilities.

Comparison to Other Bug Bounty Programs
Microsoft’s bug bounty program is not the only one of its kind, and other companies have established similar programs with varying degrees of success. Some programs have narrower scope language and handle many cases through back-channel negotiation, while others have more expansive scope and clearer guidelines. According to Avakian, Microsoft’s approach is distinct in that it provides better signaling and clearer guidelines, which can result in fewer gray-area arguments and more consistent reporting of vulnerabilities. However, the effectiveness of the program ultimately depends on the research community’s willingness to participate and adhere to the program’s rules and guidelines.

Conclusion and Future Directions
In conclusion, Microsoft’s bug bounty program has undergone significant changes, expanding its scope to include more types of vulnerabilities and testing methods. The program’s approach has both pros and cons, including the potential for fewer disqualifications and more early-stage findings, but also relies heavily on researcher goodwill and internal judgment calls. As the program continues to evolve, it will be important to monitor its effectiveness and make adjustments as needed. Additionally, other companies may consider adopting similar approaches to encourage responsible disclosure and safe testing practices. Ultimately, the success of Microsoft’s bug bounty program will depend on the research community’s willingness to participate and adhere to the program’s rules and guidelines, and on the company’s ability to provide clear guidelines and consistent support to researchers.