How Security Researchers and Bug Bounty Programs Can Build Lasting Partnerships

While bug bounty programs are often seen as transactional—researchers submit reports, and programs issue payouts—true success comes from building long-term relationships. When program managers actively engage with researchers, they create an environment that attracts and retains top talent. In turn, researchers who develop a deep understanding of a program’s priorities, assets, and security concerns can uncover vulnerabilities that might otherwise go undetected.

In this post, I’ll share practical strategies for both researchers and programs to foster these valuable partnerships. 

Program Overview 

When you open a bug bounty program page, the first thing you see is the Program Overview. This is the front door into a bug bounty program.

Anything a program can add here to spotlight priorities, offer insight, and set expectations will go a long way. To attract high-quality research, go beyond listing scope and rewards—use this space to provide meaningful insight into your security program:

• Which assets are of higher priority within your scope?
• Are there specific bug classes that pose a greater concern?
• Can you share details on your tech stack?
• How do you evaluate severity, and what are your expected response timelines?

Beyond those technical and operational specifics, this is a great way for programs to share a glimpse into their culture and the value placed on security research—a relational touch that can set the tone for a desire to build relationships with researchers. 

Likewise, for researchers, being well versed with a program's guidelines before starting research is not only essential to ensure compliance with program policies, but often is a treasure map of high-value targets and preferred research areas. By understanding what the program values most, researchers can focus their efforts on vulnerabilities that will have the greatest impact and reward potential.

Report Submission and Communication 

Quality reports—well-written, easy to follow, and clearly demonstrate impact—are vital for quick triage and accurate severity assessment. There are many great resources on how to write a good report. I’d suggest reading this guide to writing quality reports and this blog post which are both great resources on this topic.

As of late, I often include a proof of concept video, walking through the full reproduction of the issue, with narration. This seems to make a noticeable difference in the speed of triage as it can often add clarity with reproduction if I’ve overlooked anything with my written steps. 

Clear reports are a key component to building relationships with programs. 

What else works? 

Compliments go a long way. On both sides of the report, remember you’re interacting with another person who is working hard. Any time you can call out something in appreciation, take the opportunity to do so. A simple, “Great find!” or “Thank you for the quick reply!” can have a big impact. 

I’d encourage you to strive to reply quickly, but also understand when the other party doesn’t. Those participating in the report may be in different time zones. Programs often deal with a large number of reports, and it’s likely the program staff have internal obligations outside of the program as well. In the same way, many security researchers have full-time employment in addition to their work with bug bounty programs.

Also, remember it’s okay to disagree, but how you do so matters greatly. Here are my personal rules for working through disagreements—that seem to help me keep a level head and maintain good relationships…or, as I like to call it, the PATCH method.

• Pause - calm down (an emotionally charged response helps no one)
• Appreciate - compliment what I can (even in a disagreement, I often have something I can genuinely appreciate)
• “To me” verbiage - express my point of view (“from my side this seems…” lands a whole lot differently than “you’re wrong…”)
• Concede - admit I could be wrong or be missing something (I often am)
• Have perspective - remember this is not my first or last report (I’ve had lots of great outcomes and fully expect more)

I think it’s valuable and healthy to express frustrations or disagreements. But to do so in a hostile way is counterproductive. Done right, I think it’s a great way to not only occasionally change report outcomes but also to understand misperceptions and have a better sense of reality.

Learning From Previous Reports 

For Programs:

Each report represents an opportunity to refine your security program:

• Track common misunderstandings to identify areas where your program overview needs clarification.
• Note which researchers consistently provide high-value reports and consider offering them early access to new scopes or features.
• Request feedback from your most valuable contributors.

Programs that view each submission as insight into their relational equity with the researcher community will build stronger researcher relationships.

For Researchers:

Every interaction with a program contains valuable lessons:

• Review your closed reports to identify patterns in what specific programs value.
• Maintain a personal knowledge base of program-specific insights.
• Experiment with different report formats to see what resonates with specific programs.

Researchers who learn from each submission, whether accepted or rejected, continuously increase their value to programs.

Conclusion 

At every step of your bug bounty journey, ask yourself:

“How can I build a relationship here?”

When researchers and programs commit to collaboration—not just transactions—the benefits extend beyond individual reports and payouts. Strong partnerships create a more engaging, efficient, and rewarding experience for both sides that benefits everyone involved.

Whether you’re a researcher or a program manager, start building those relationships today—because collaboration is the key to success.

Learn more about the HackerOne community and how to get involved in bug bounty programs.