Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Vulnerabilities / Threats

3/30/2020
03:45 PM
50%
50%

HackerOne Drops Mobile Voting App Vendor Voatz

Bug bounty platform provider cited "Voatz's pattern of interactions with the research community" in its decision to halt the app vendor's vuln disclosure program on HackerOne.

Mobile voting application vendor Voatz has been dismissed from HackerOne's bug bounty program platform, according to a report on CyberScoop.

Voatz — whose mobile voting app used in limited elections in a handful of states, including West Virginia and Colorado — has been under intense scrutiny over security concerns, and recently published studies by MIT and Trail of Bits uncovered significant security weaknesses in the app.

While security experts long have dismissed mobile voting as inherently risky, proponents of mobile-voting have maintained that the apps and process are more secure and private, for example, than the standard practice of sending PDF-based ballots via unencrypted email to military personnel overseas.

Voatz recently had updated its bug bounty policy on HackerOne to say that it could not "guarantee safe harbor" for researchers who discover flaws in its software under the program, CyberScoop said in its report.

"After evaluating Voatz's pattern of interactions with the research community, we decided to terminate the program on the HackerOne platform," a HackerOne spokesperson said in the CyberScoop report. "We partner with organizations that prioritize acting in good faith towards the security researcher community and providing adequate access to researchers for testing."

Voatz plans to kick off a new bug bounty program, it said.

See the full article here.

Check out The Edge, Dark Reading's new section for features, threat data, and in-depth perspectives. Today's top story: "How to Evict Attackers Living Off Your Land." 

 

Dark Reading's Quick Hits delivers a brief synopsis and summary of the significance of breaking news events. For more information from the original source of the news item, please follow the link provided in this article. View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
emmawatson02020
50%
50%
emmawatson02020,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/2/2020 | 4:38:04 AM
Reply
Such a nice post.. I appreciate you...
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
3/31/2020 | 8:00:27 PM
Re: Two problems
You hit the nail right on the head here my friend. Very comprehensive analysis. These vendors need to be held accountable. Otherwise, instances like this will run rampant and we will be sacrificing consumer security and in this case privacy in the process.
Ppooo
50%
50%
Ppooo,
User Rank: Apprentice
3/31/2020 | 10:14:12 AM
Two problems
There are two problems here.  One is that Voatz was acting in bad faith and attacking the researchers' motive.  Two is that HackerOne does not prevent abuse of scope/criticality classification by its members. 

In this example, Voatz classified the bug as out of scope, even though it was later reclassified.  By its initial classification, Voatz was exempted from any obligation to fix it, but the submitter was still bound to HackerOne's NDA.  That is a loophole that HackerOne needs to fix.

If a bug is truly not in scope, and the vendor does not plan to fix within a normal disclosure period, or at least show good faith progress on resolving, then the researcher should be free to disclose it on their normal timeline, and not be bound by an NDA.

There have been numerous examples of security researchers being burned by this.  They discover something they think is serious, they submit to HackerOne, the vendor disagrees with the seriousness, the researcher discloses over HackerOne's objections, the bug is only then reclassified and addressed by the vendor due to public pressure.  Meanwhile, because the researcher violated HackerOne's NDA, their reputation is harmed.

HackerOne must show allegiance to the researchers, not the vendors.  This loophole must be fixed.
RyanSepe
100%
0%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
3/30/2020 | 6:42:35 PM
Alarming
Voatz not painting itself in the best light here. Outside of convenience a close second in priority if not on the same tier with convenience is integrity (CIA). So if you fail to see the importance of security as a voting mobile platform you are really missing the mark.
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 5/22/2020
How an Industry Consortium Can Reinvent Security Solution Testing
Henry Harrison, Co-founder & Chief Technology Officer, Garrison,  5/21/2020
10 iOS Security Tips to Lock Down Your iPhone
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  5/22/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
How Cybersecurity Incident Response Programs Work (and Why Some Don't)
This Tech Digest takes a look at the vital role cybersecurity incident response (IR) plays in managing cyber-risk within organizations. Download the Tech Digest today to find out how well-planned IR programs can detect intrusions, contain breaches, and help an organization restore normal operations.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-13442
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-25
A Remote code execution vulnerability exists in DEXT5Upload in DEXT5 through 2.7.1402870. An attacker can upload a PHP file via dext5handler.jsp handler because the uploaded file is stored under dext5uploadeddata/.
CVE-2020-5537
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-25
Cybozu Desktop for Windows 2.0.23 to 2.2.40 allows remote code execution via unspecified vectors.
CVE-2020-13438
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-24
ffjpeg through 2020-02-24 has an invalid read in jfif_encode in jfif.c.
CVE-2020-13439
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-24
ffjpeg through 2020-02-24 has a heap-based buffer over-read in jfif_decode in jfif.c.
CVE-2020-13440
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-24
ffjpeg through 2020-02-24 has an invalid write in bmp_load in bmp.c.