A Deep Dive Into How Open-Source Project Maintainers Review and Resolve Bug Bounty Reports

Jessy Ayala, Steven Ngo, Joshua Garcia
{"title":"A Deep Dive Into How Open-Source Project Maintainers Review and Resolve Bug Bounty Reports","authors":"Jessy Ayala, Steven Ngo, Joshua Garcia","doi":"arxiv-2409.07670","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Researchers have investigated the bug bounty ecosystem from the lens of\nplatforms, programs, and bug hunters. Understanding the perspectives of bug\nbounty report reviewers, especially those who historically lack a security\nbackground and little to no funding for bug hunters, is currently understudied.\nIn this paper, we primarily investigate the perspective of open-source software\n(OSS) maintainers who have used \\texttt{huntr}, a bug bounty platform that pays\nbounties to bug hunters who find security bugs in GitHub projects and have had\nvalid vulnerabilities patched as a result. We address this area by conducting\nthree studies: identifying characteristics through a listing survey ($n_1=51$),\ntheir ranked importance with Likert-scale survey data ($n_2=90$), and\nconducting semi-structured interviews to dive deeper into real-world\nexperiences ($n_3=17$). As a result, we categorize 40 identified\ncharacteristics into benefits, challenges, helpful features, and wanted\nfeatures. We find that private disclosure and project visibility are the most\nimportant benefits, while hunters focused on money or CVEs and pressure to\nreview are the most challenging to overcome. Surprisingly, lack of\ncommunication with bug hunters is the least challenging, and CVE creation\nsupport is the second-least helpful feature for OSS maintainers when reviewing\nbug bounty reports. We present recommendations to make the bug bounty review\nprocess more accommodating to open-source maintainers and identify areas for\nfuture work.","PeriodicalId":501278,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - CS - Software Engineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - CS - Software Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2409.07670","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Researchers have investigated the bug bounty ecosystem from the lens of platforms, programs, and bug hunters. Understanding the perspectives of bug bounty report reviewers, especially those who historically lack a security background and little to no funding for bug hunters, is currently understudied. In this paper, we primarily investigate the perspective of open-source software (OSS) maintainers who have used \texttt{huntr}, a bug bounty platform that pays bounties to bug hunters who find security bugs in GitHub projects and have had valid vulnerabilities patched as a result. We address this area by conducting three studies: identifying characteristics through a listing survey ($n_1=51$), their ranked importance with Likert-scale survey data ($n_2=90$), and conducting semi-structured interviews to dive deeper into real-world experiences ($n_3=17$). As a result, we categorize 40 identified characteristics into benefits, challenges, helpful features, and wanted features. We find that private disclosure and project visibility are the most important benefits, while hunters focused on money or CVEs and pressure to review are the most challenging to overcome. Surprisingly, lack of communication with bug hunters is the least challenging, and CVE creation support is the second-least helpful feature for OSS maintainers when reviewing bug bounty reports. We present recommendations to make the bug bounty review process more accommodating to open-source maintainers and identify areas for future work.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
深入了解开源项目维护者如何审查和解决漏洞悬赏报告
研究人员从平台、程序和漏洞猎人的角度对漏洞赏金生态系统进行了调查。在本文中,我们主要调查了使用过 \texttt{huntr} 这个漏洞赏金平台的开源软件(OSS)维护者的视角,该平台向在 GitHub 项目中发现安全漏洞并因此修补了有效漏洞的漏洞猎人支付赏金。我们针对这一领域开展了三项研究:通过列表调查确定特征($n_1=51$),利用李克特量表调查数据对其重要性进行排序($n_2=90$),以及进行半结构化访谈以深入了解真实世界的经验($n_3=17$)。因此,我们将发现的 40 个特征分为好处、挑战、有用的特征和想要的特征。我们发现,隐私披露和项目可见性是最重要的好处,而以金钱或 CVE 为重点的猎人和审查压力则是最难克服的挑战。令人惊讶的是,缺乏与漏洞猎人的沟通是最没有挑战性的,而 CVE 创建支持是开放源码软件维护人员在审查漏洞悬赏报告时第二没有帮助的功能。我们提出了一些建议,以使漏洞悬赏审查过程更适合开源软件维护人员,并确定了今后的工作领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Promise and Peril of Collaborative Code Generation Models: Balancing Effectiveness and Memorization Shannon Entropy is better Feature than Category and Sentiment in User Feedback Processing Motivations, Challenges, Best Practices, and Benefits for Bots and Conversational Agents in Software Engineering: A Multivocal Literature Review A Taxonomy of Self-Admitted Technical Debt in Deep Learning Systems Investigating team maturity in an agile automotive reorganization
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1