closed as informative: the SSRF that read the cloud metadata and still was not "a bug"
a short angry story, because I need to vent and because "informative" is the most insulting word in bug bounty.
a company (private program, calling them "Shipr") had an image import feature. you give it a url, it fetches the image server side and stores it. classic SSRF territory. I pointed it at an internal address that only their own servers can reach, the kind of link to a cloud metadata service, and it happily fetched it and showed me the response. on a lot of cloud setups that response is temporary credentials for the server's role. I did not pull credentials. I proved the server would fetch an internal only address and return the body, screenshotted it, redacted it, stopped there, and wrote "this is SSRF reaching the metadata endpoint, please confirm IMDSv2 is enforced, I have not pulled any tokens".
they closed it as informative. reason: "the url was provided by the user, this is expected behaviour". expected behaviour. the server fetching its own internal network on command is expected behaviour. voilà.
I appealed once with a calm explanation of what SSRF to metadata usually leads to, linked their own cloud provider's docs saying to enforce IMDSv2 exactly to stop this, and left it. three weeks later the import feature quietly started rejecting internal addresses. no reopen, no bounty, no thanks. they fixed it and kept pretending it was never broken.
the lesson for anyone starting: "informative" sometimes means "you are wrong" and sometimes means "you are right and we do not want to pay you". learn to tell the difference, keep your reports factual, never pull the credential just to prove the point (you do not need to, and now you are the one with a problem), and move on. the fix shipping IS the win, even when the platform never admits it. the bounty would have been nicer though. I am not a saint.
Get the best of #hack_the_planet weekly
One email each Monday with the most useful posts. No spam; unsubscribe in one click.
Comments
Sign in to join the conversation.
Sign in to comment