Our promise to you

• We are happy to respond to any questions, please use the button in the right top corner for this.
• We respect the safe harbour clause that you can find below

Your promise to us

• Provide detailed but to-the point reproduction steps
• Include a clear attack scenario. How will this affect us exactly?
• Remember: quality over quantity!
• Please do not discuss or post vulnerabilities without our consent (including PoC's on YouTube and Vimeo)

The use of an intigriti.me address is mandatory at all times!

We are happy to announce our program! We've done our best to clean most of our known issues and now would like to request your help to spot the once we missed! We are specifically looking for

• CVE-2021- 44228 and all Log4Shell relating issues
• leaking of personal data
• horizontal / vertical privilege escalation
• SQLi
• ...

IMPORTANT:
Some websites partially share the same codebase and can contain common issues. If a specific issue has already been found in another Port of Antwerp-Bruges website it will be treated as a duplicate.

Rewards

Port of Antwerp-Bruges SWAG will be awarded for valid High+ submissions

Feedback
Would you like to help us improve our program or have some feedback to share, please send your anonymous feedback here:
Program Feedback Link
Please note this form will be checked periodically and should not be used for submission or support queries.

Domains

• jobs.portofantwerp.com
• jobs.portofantwerpbruges.com
• media.portofantwerp.com
• media.portofantwerpbruges.com
• future.portofantwerp.com
• future.portofantwerpbruges.com
• register.portofantwerp.com
• register.portofantwerpbruges.com (NOTE: register-accpt.portofantwerpbruges.com and register-test.portofantwerpbruges.com are IN scope!)

Actions

Doing registrations on our websites without the use of an intigriti.me address

Application

• API key disclosure without proven business impac
• Wordpress usernames disclosure
• Pre-Auth Account takeover/OAuth squatting
• Self-XSS that cannot be used to exploit other users
• Verbose messages/files/directory listings without disclosing any sensitive information
• CORS misconfiguration on non-sensitive endpoints
• Missing cookie flags
• Missing security headers
• Cross-site Request Forgery with no or low impact
• Presence of autocomplete attribute on web forms
• Reverse tabnabbing
• Bypassing rate-limits or the non-existence of rate-limits.
• Best practices violations (password complexity, expiration, re-use, etc.)
• Clickjacking without proven impact/unrealistic user interaction
• CSV Injection
• Sessions not being invalidated (logout, enabling 2FA, etc.)
• Tokens leaked to third parties
• Anything related to email spoofing, SPF, DMARC or DKIM
• Content injection without being able to modify the HTML
• Username/email enumeration
• Email bombing
• HTTP Request smuggling without any proven impact
• Homograph attacks
• XMLRPC enabled
• Banner grabbing/Version disclosure
• Not stripping metadata of files
• Same-site scripting
• Subdomain takeover without taking over the subdomain
• Arbitrary file upload without proof of the existence of the uploaded file
• Blind SSRF without proven business impact (pingbacks are not sufficient)
• Disclosed/misconfigured Google Maps API keys
• Host header injection without proven business impact

General

• In case that a reported vulnerability was already known to the company from their own tests, it will be flagged as a duplicate
• Theoretical security issues with no realistic exploit scenario(s) or attack surfaces, or issues that would require complex end user interactions to be exploited
• Spam, social engineering and physical intrusion
• DoS/DDoS attacks or brute force attacks
• Vulnerabilities that only work on software that no longer receive security updates
• Attacks requiring physical access to a victim's computer/device, man in the middle or compromised user accounts
• Recently discovered zero-day vulnerabilities found in in-scope assets within 14 days after the public release of a patch or mitigation may be reported, but are usually not eligible for a bounty
• Reports that state that software is out of date/vulnerable without a proof-of-concept

Mobile

• Shared links leaked through the system clipboard
• Any URIs leaked because a malicious app has permission to view URIs opened
• The absence of certificate pinning
• Sensitive data in URLs/request bodies when protected by TLS
• Lack of obfuscation
• Path disclosure in the binary
• Self-XSS that cannot be used to exploit other users
• Lack of jailbreak & root detection
• Crashes due to malformed URL Schemes
• Lack of binary protection (anti-debugging) controls, mobile SSL pinning
• Snapshot/Pasteboard leakage
• Runtime hacking exploits (exploits only possible in a jailbroken environment)
• API key leakage used for insensitive activities/actions
• Attacks requiring physical access to the victim's device
• Attacks requiring installing malicious applications onto the victim's device

All our rewards are impact based, therefore we kindly ask you to carefully evaluate a vulnerability's impact when picking a severity rating. To give you an idea of what kind of bugs belong in a certain severity rating we've put some examples below. Note that depending on the impact a bug can sometimes be given a higher/lower severity rating.

Exceptional

• RCE (Remote Code Execution)

Critical

• SQL injection
• Authentication bypass on critical infrastructure
• Privilege escalation

High

• Access to all customer personal data
• Stored XSS without user interaction

Medium

• XSS
• CSRF with a significant impact

Low

• XSS that requires lots of user interaction ( > 3 steps)
• CSRF with a very limited impact

Port of Antwerp-Bruges is following intigriti's standard view on severity assessment and impact analysis. More information can be found on:
https://kb.intigriti.com/en/articles/5041991-intigriti-s-contextual-cvss-standard

Where can we get credentials for the app?

We currently don’t offer any credentials to test user roles.