If you’re a serious security researcher in the Bug Bounty world, you’ve probably experienced this frustration: you spend sleepless nights, reverse-engineering code, discovering a real critical vulnerability (SSRF, info leak, auth bypass, whatever), writing a clear report with PoC and solid evidence. You submit it to Bugcrowd, and then some staff member (calling themselves a “triager” or “security analyst”) replies with a dumb canned response:
“We were unable to identify an immediate security impact, so this submission is not applicable. Please clarify: What could an attacker do?”
And if you reply with a detailed impact analysis, you get another robotic answer:
“We still don’t see direct impact.”
At that point, you start to wonder: Are these people even real security professionals, or are they just reading from a playbook and stalling for time?
Who Are the Bugcrowd Staff and Why Do They Act Like This?
Most of the triage or “support” staff at Bugcrowd aren’t hackers, and often lack hands-on offensive security background. Many are just IT graduates or people with a generic “security certification” or a management title. This is painfully obvious when you see them:
Failing to distinguish between a harmless info leak and a real credential/API/key exposure.
Thinking SSRF is “low risk” even when it gives full backend or AWS metadata access.
Asking you to repeat steps line by line as if you’re a child—or, more likely, because they’re just skimming your report!
Closing reports because they “don’t see immediate impact”, even when you provided direct PoC, screenshots, and logs.
Worst of all: Sometimes, when a European or US-based hacker submits the same vuln (but with pretty English), it’s instantly accepted and rewarded. But if you’re an Arab, African, or Asian researcher? Get ready for endless “not applicable” and “not impactful” responses.
That’s bias—and sometimes, straight-up discrimination disguised as “process”.
Why Is This Behavior Dangerous?
Loss of Trust: When triage is handled by people with no practical security experience, important vulnerabilities are dismissed, putting companies and users at risk.
Wasted Talent: Hundreds of hours spent by skilled researchers get thrown in the trash because of lazy or clueless staff who can’t see the real-world impact.
False Sense of Security: Bugcrowd gives its clients the illusion that they’re secure, while real vulnerabilities go unresolved—until a real attacker shows up!
A Message to Bugcrowd "Triagers" and Staff:
Shame on you! Without real security researchers, your platform is worthless. You’re just a middleman.
If you don’t have hands-on hacking experience, you have no business closing SSRF, key leaks, or other advanced reports.
Apply clear impact criteria to everyone—regardless of nationality, language, or background.
Take every report seriously. Don’t rely on canned responses or close tickets because you’re busy or don’t understand the technical details.
Advice for Real Bug Bounty Hunters:
Don’t let their ignorance demotivate you or convince you that your report is weak. You know the real impact of your work. If they had real offensive experience, they’d recognize the risk immediately.
Keep pushing back, escalate, file support tickets, and share your story (as long as it doesn’t violate NDA). Let the world know:
The real struggle for security researchers isn’t the bugs—it’s the clueless middlemen standing in the way.
Conclusion
Bugcrowd, like many platforms today, is full of triagers with no real-world hacking background. They’re just ticket processors, reading scripts, and the ones who suffer most are real security pros who waste time and energy for nothing.
If you feel frustrated by them, you’re not alone. The hacker community is bigger, smarter, and louder. If you speak up, they’ll have to change—or people will just move to better platforms.
Top comments (0)