HexBrain

HackerOne · Report #327088

Extra program metrics disclosed via /PROGRAM_NAME json response

Validstatus
mediumseverity
51upvotes
28 Mar 2018disclosed

How it was found

Summary: The response to www.hackerone.com/PROGRAM.json includes sla_missed_count sla_failed_count and researcher_count.

Description: Viewing the response from a program's json endpoint includes the values for sla_missed_count, sla_failed_count and researcher_count.

With regards to the SLA metrics, these are not included in the UI on the policy page and hovering over a program indicator just reveals a summary of the information, such as >=1 report has failed the SLA. There is no mention of these values being disclosed in the program settings pages and according to the SLA FAQ docs, only a summarized version of a program’s response efficiency metric performance [will be displayed] on their hacker facing security page https://support.hackerone.com/hc/en-us/articles/115005927583-Response-SLAs-on-Security-Pages

With regards to the researcher count, I'm including this because the information isn't disclosed in the UI when you have a pending invite to a program and I'm not sure why that might be. Nonetheless, viewing the same JSON response includes the researcher_count

Steps To Reproduce

  1. Log in
  2. Visit any program and have Burp capture the response
  3. Confirm the bottom of the JSON response includes the SLA information

Supporting Material/References (Screenshots)

{F273408}

Impact

The program settings page nor documentation indicates that SLA misses/fails will be disclosed. This information should be considered sensitive in nature and programs should opt into disclosing it if this is intentional since it reveals a minimum number of security vulnerabilities a program may be addressing (I say may because the SLA violation could be response / triage).

The researcher count could be considered sensitive in the context of a private invite, revealing how many vulnerabilities have been found by what number of people before having actually accepted an invitation. I recognize this is a stretch but also assume there is a reason this number isn't disclosed before accepting a private invitation.

This report was disclosed publicly on HackerOne and belongs to its author and the program. See the original