A few days ago I jumped back into a bug bounty program after being away for a while.
Like a lot of hunters, I disappear sometimes. When I return, I don’t reinvent the wheel. I open the methodology document I wrote for myself and follow it step by step — recon first, then deeper testing.
The biggest shift in my approach over the years is this:
I don’t treat OWASP vulnerabilities as the priority.
I go after business logic flaws.
Business logic is how the application actually operates — the real flow of value, the process that makes money for the company. Once you understand that flow, you can start looking for ways to break it, bypass steps, or manipulate parameters so the system works in the attacker’s favor instead of the owner’s.
Because of this focus, my recon looks different from the usual “run tools and hope” approach.
Directory brute-forcing rarely helps me. Instead I study the application by using it. I keep Burp Suite open, capture every request and response, and slowly build two things:
A logical mind map of the application — which pages and inputs lead where, how the business process actually moves.
Technical data — exact request structure, headers, parameters, and response behavior.
I map both at the same time. After enough interaction, the potentially dangerous spots start to stand out on their own.
I’ve had multiple cases where I found and reported valid bugs while still in the recon phase — simply because something in the flow looked wrong and I tested it on the spot.
That’s the real value of treating recon as active study instead of passive scanning. You’re not just collecting endpoints. You’re learning how the business works and where it can be broken.
If this way of thinking about bug bounty resonates with you, follow along. I’ll keep sharing the practical methods and mindsets that actually produce results.
Top comments (0)