News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google's login page accepts a vulnerable GET parameter by libber on Tuesday August 30, 2016 @10:31PM (#12395564)
A non-vulnerability like this is a good example of how easy it is to get press for $important_company + security.

Top of hackernews at the moment and fingers crossed there wont be a wave of articles about this in the coming days from tech press who don't fully understand the issue but know clicks when they see them.

Re:Google's login page accepts a vulnerable GET parameter by mixedCase on Tuesday August 30, 2016 @11:42PM (#12395873)
A non-vulnerability? I understand how you could call it non-serious if you don't work on user-oriented code or think all users have perfect periferic vision all the time. But how do you explain the purpose for the check that fails any non-google domain then?
Re:Google's login page accepts a vulnerable GET parameter by ejcx on Tuesday August 30, 2016 @11:31PM (#12395820)
Not only to GET press, but also to PRESS the company for $.

This is a huge problem I see with bugbounties. People running the bug bounties, who are not appsec security literate, are basically bullied in to thinking that something is a security risk when it is not quite often.

I deal with people trying to do this 10-15 times per week. I can totally see how people get pushed in to paying thousands for essentially worthless bugs.