Get a Demo
Get a Demo

Budgeting for Bug Bounty is Nearly Impossible: How to Overcome It

Budgeting for Bug Bounty is Nearly Impossible: How to Overcome It

By Team, Inspectiv

 

The allure of traditional bug bounty programs is undeniable—they promise access to a vast pool of global talent, each meticulously analyzing your systems for vulnerabilities. However, this promise comes with a dose of unpredictability, particularly in budgeting. 

 

This article navigates through the financial maze associated with bug bounty programs, unveiling a transformative solution that is reshaping the game.

 

Join us as we break down the intricacies of sustaining bug bounty programs, understand the prevalent financial issues within this industry, and how to overcome them.

 

The Unpredictability of Researcher Payouts

The realm of vulnerabilities is inherently unpredictable, a quality that underscores the necessity of bug bounty programs. Submissions received through such programs encompass a spectrum, ranging from minor glitches to critical system flaws. 

 

While this diversity enhances security measures, it also poses a formidable financial challenge: how does one allocate funds when the nature and volume of incoming vulnerabilities remain uncertain?

 

Currently, there are a few ways to manage this. For example:

 

Limited-Time Programs

You can decide to run your program for a short period of time, like a week, to get a gauge for how many bugs come through. 

 

This isn't a perfect system though, because there still might be many more vulnerabilities found than you expected in that first week.

 

Limited-Scope Programs

You can decide to run your program on a smaller scope initially, and gradually open up the scope as you become more confident in the amount of bugs you are receiving. But there’s a problem with this.

 

The problem? It's still not predictable, because even a single asset may be full of expensive, unexpected bugs.


Limited Payout Pools

You can run a program until the money runs out. For pricing predictability, this is better than a limited time program or a limited scope program, but it still isn't perfect. 

 

What if you have $100 left in the pool and then someone submits a $10,000 critical bug?

 

VDPs

A Vulnerability disclosure program (VDP) is essentially a bug bounty program that does not incentivize researchers with monetary payouts. 

 

Some programs decide to run a VDP for a short while to gauge how many bugs are likely to be found, and then they switch to a Bug Bounty Program (BBP) when they feel confident that they can predict costs more accurately.

 

The problem? VDPs typically don't attract the best bug bounty hunters, so the bugs you are likely to receive are low-hanging fruit from a different caliber of hackers. 

 

For this reason, running a VDP doesn't give a very accurate indication of what it would be like running a full bug bounty program. 

 

It also isn't as good as a bug bounty program for security purposes.

 

The Unpredictability of Researcher Payouts The Risk of Running out of funds

At the core of the cybersecurity community is an indispensable element: trust. It forms the bedrock upon which researchers, upon identifying vulnerabilities, rely on the assurance of receiving due rewards. 

 

However, when the financial well runs dry, the repercussions extend beyond immediate monetary concerns to encompass a substantial long-term risk to reputation.

 

The aftermath of a missed payout is not confined to its fiscal implications; it has the potential to generate adverse publicity and disgruntled security researchers. 

 

This, in turn, casts a shadow over customer trust and may even impact revenue streams. The crux of the matter lies in the organizational structure, often designed with static fund allocation methods that fail to accommodate the unpredictable and widely varying costs associated with activities like bug bounties. 

 

This structural misalignment poses a significant challenge in fostering sustained trust within the cybersecurity ecosystem.

 

The Advantages of Inspectiv's Pricing Model

This can cause cybersecurity efforts to be spread thin, leaving potential weak spots. As technology evolves, it's important for organizations to find better ways to defend against cyber threats by going beyond these challenges and having a smarter, more complete plan.

 

Inspectiv offers a transformative Bug Bounty-as-a-Service solution with its transparent pricing model. This model stands out for several reasons, each contributing to a more efficient and predictable budgeting experience. Let’s break it down.

 

Streamlined Budgeting with Consistency in Costs

With Inspectiv, simplicity meets certainty through our straightforward, subscription-based flat-fee pricing. Our transparent approach guarantees a clear understanding of costs right from the start. 

 

This enables meticulous financial planning without the unpredictable instabilities often linked to variable pricing. 

 

The subscription-based model featuring a flat fee structure empowers security teams to anticipate expenditures, facilitating streamlined fiscal planning and enhancing resource management capabilities.

 

Tailored Security Measures

Inspectiv meets the specific needs of different types of applications, giving security professionals the freedom to apply precise security measures tailored for Android, iOS, and web applications. 

 

This flexible approach not only ensures a customized security setup but is cost-effective by avoiding expenses for features that aren't needed.

 

Adaptability for Growth

With plans to introduce varied pricing tiers and different SKUs, Inspectiv has positioned itself to accommodate the evolving needs of security professionals in different stages of company growth. 

 

This foresight ensures that as their organizations grow, security teams can scale their security measures without a complete overhaul of their budget or strategy.

 

In addition, Inspectiv's pricing model is designed to offer simplicity, predictability, and adaptability, addressing the core needs of security practitioners in budgeting and planning.

 

Conclusion

Traditional bug bounty programs, while groundbreaking in their approach, have revealed significant challenges in budget predictability and resource allocation. 

 

The unpredictability inherent in these programs can lead to financial headaches and potential reputational risks. suscade1

 

However, with innovative solutions like Inspectiv's hybrid model, companies can harness the strengths of both bug bounties and penetration testing, all while maintaining a clear, predictable budget. 

 

It's not just about financial clarity; it's about building a robust, comprehensive security strategy that stands the test of time.

 

Ready to harness the power of continuous automated and manual vulnerability detection to protect what matters most?

Request a Demo from Inspectiv