Microsoft wouldn't look at a bug report without a video. Researcher maliciously complied

Microsoft wouldn't look at a bug report without a video. Researcher maliciously complied

  • 17.03.2025 10:20
  • msn.com
  • Keywords: Vulnerability, Bug Report

A researcher submitted a detailed bug report to Microsoft, including screenshots, but was told a video proof of concept was needed. In response, the analyst created a 15-minute video with a Zoolander reference and techno music to sarcastically emphasize the inefficiency of requiring such a trivial addition.

Microsoft ReportsMSFTsentiment_dissatisfied
open_in_newOriginal article

Estimated market influence

Microsoft

Microsoft

Negativesentiment_dissatisfied
Analyst rating: Strong buy

MSRC requires video proof of concept for vulnerability reports, which is uncommon and frustrated researchers.

Will Dormann

Negativesentiment_dissatisfied
Analyst rating: N/A

Dormann's frustration led to creating a malicious compliant video with Zoolander reference and techno music.

Context

Analysis: Microsoft's Bug Report Requirements and Market Implications

Key Facts

  • Will Dormann, a senior principal vulnerability analyst, reported a bug to Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC) with detailed descriptions and screenshots.
  • MSRC demanded a 15-minute video proof of concept (POC) to proceed, despite the issue already being documented in screenshots.
  • Dormann complied by creating a 15-minute video featuring:
    • A Zoolander reference flashing at the 4-second mark.
    • A techno backing track.
    • 14 minutes of deliberate inactivity to highlight the absurdity of the request.
  • The video upload failed due to a 403 error when submitted via Microsoft's portal.
  • Dormann reported three vulnerabilities, two requiring videos and one rejected despite evidence.

Market & Industry Implications

  • Unusual Requirement: Requiring a video POC is not standard in the vulnerability disclosure industry.
    • CISA’s VINCE program allows a single 10 MB file to support written reports.
    • UK public sector organizations follow NCSC guidelines, which do not mandate videos.
  • Perception of MSRC: The demand for videos may signal to researchers that reviewers are following a checklist rather than genuinely understanding the report.
  • Reputation Risk: Dormann’s experience could deter other researchers from submitting detailed reports if they feel their efforts are undervalued.

Competitive Dynamics

  • Researcher Relations: Microsoft risks alienating security researchers who provide critical vulnerability disclosures. Such policies may lead to fewer submissions and delayed patches.
  • Industry Standards: The incident highlights MSRC’s deviation from standard practices, potentially affecting its reputation as a leader in coordinated vulnerability disclosure (CVD) programs.

Long-term Effects

  • Regulatory Impact: If other vendors adopt similar rigid requirements, it could prompt regulatory scrutiny or changes in industry standards.
  • Strategic Considerations: Companies relying on external researchers for security vulnerabilities must balance process rigor with researcher goodwill to maintain an effective bug bounty program.

Conclusion

The incident underscores the importance of fostering trust and collaboration between vendors and security researchers. While MSRC aims to ensure thoroughness, overly bureaucratic demands risk undermining these efforts.