Amazon Vulnerability Research Program
By Amazon Bug bounty on HackerOne amazon.com
- Top reward
- $30,000
- Top severity paid
- Critical
- Assets in scope
- 120
- Public CVEs
- 60
- Last change
At a glance
What to know before you start testing.
- Pays up to $30,000
- for critical bugs.
- Report on HackerOne
- Submit through the program page.
- Partial safe harbor
- Some legal protection; read the terms.
- No public write-ups
- Keep findings private.
Rewards
What HackerOne lists as the payout for each severity.
| Severity | Relative size | Reward |
|---|---|---|
| Critical |
|
$30,000 from $12,000 |
| High |
|
$8,000 from $2,000 |
| Medium |
|
$4,000 from $3,000 |
| Low |
|
$500 |
- Safe harbor
-
Partial
Amazon will not bring any legal action against anyone who makes a good faith effort to comply with this Policy, or for any accidental or good faith violation of this Policy.
Summarised with AI from the program policy on HackerOne, read 12 Nov 2026, and checked word for word against it. Read the original
Scope
120 assets you may test, 10 excluded.
Android apps 42
- amazon.speech.sim Critical
- com.amazon.aba.application Critical
- com.amazon.amazonvideo.livingroom Critical
- com.amazon.astro Critical
- com.amazon.avod.thirdpartyclient Critical
- com.amazon.clouddrive.photos Critical
- com.amazon.dee.alexaonwearos Critical
- com.amazon.dee.app Critical
- com.amazon.enterprise.access.android Critical
- com.amazon.firetv.recast.blaster.aosp Critical
- com.amazon.flex.rabbit Critical
- com.amazon.helix.prod Critical
- com.amazon.ihm.candycane Critical
- com.amazon.imdb.tv.mobile.app Critical
- com.amazon.kindle Critical
- com.amazon.kisan.app Critical
- com.amazon.minitv.android.app Critical
- com.amazon.mp3 Critical
- com.amazon.mp3.automotiveOS Critical
- com.amazon.mShop.android.business.shopping Critical
- com.amazon.mShop.android.shopping Critical
- com.amazon.music.tv Critical
- com.amazon.primenow.seller.android Critical
- com.amazon.relay Critical
- com.amazon.sellerflexmobile Critical
- com.amazon.sellermobile.android Critical
- com.amazon.sft.rangoli.seller.app Critical
- com.amazon.shopperpanel.android.mobile.app Critical
- com.amazon.storm.lightning.client.aosp Critical
- com.amazon.swa.mobileapp Critical
- com.amazon.tahoe.freetime Critical
- com.amazon.tahoe.grownups Critical
- com.amazon.tails Critical
- com.amazon.technician.android Critical
- com.amazon.vendormobile.android Critical
- com.amazon.vendormobile.india.android Critical
- com.amazon.warhol.android Critical
- com.amazon.ziggy.android Critical
- com.imdbtv.livingroom Critical
- com.localqueen Critical
- in.amazon.mShop.android.business.shopping Critical
- in.amazon.mShop.android.shopping Critical
iOS apps 35
- 1057338687 Critical
- 1151746202 Critical
- 1265170914 Critical
- 1276296103 Critical
- 1324809509 Critical
- 1454725763 Critical
- 1475021574 Critical
- 1478350915 Critical
- 1494755014 Critical
- 1498197033 Critical
- 1528364633 Critical
- 1532153219 Critical
- 1552455423 Critical
- 1579372261 Critical
- 1592204907 Critical
- 1659883691 Critical
- 297606951 Critical
- 302584613 Critical
- 335187483 Critical
- 342576766 Critical
- 348712880 Critical
- 358861688 Critical
- 374254473 Critical
- 510855668 Critical
- 545519333 Critical
- 621574163 Critical
- 6444868926 Critical
- 6452192521 Critical
- 6471528064 Critical
- 6479334468 Critical
- 6560104638 Critical
- 794141485 Critical
- 944011620 Critical
- 947984433 Critical
- 988788863 Critical
Wildcard domains 27
- *.amazon.ae Critical
- *.amazon.ca Critical
- *.amazon.cl Critical
- *.amazon.cn Critical
- *.amazon.co.jp Critical
- *.amazon.com Critical
- *.amazon.com.au Critical
- *.amazon.com.be Critical
- *.amazon.com.br Critical
- *.amazon.com.co Critical
- *.amazon.com.mx Critical
- *.amazon.com.ng Critical
- *.amazon.com.tr Critical
- *.amazon.co.uk Critical
- *.amazon.co.za Critical
- *.amazon.de Critical
- *.amazon.eg Critical
- *.amazon.es Critical
- *.amazon.fr Critical
- *.amazon.in Critical
- *.amazon.it Critical
- *.amazon.nl Critical
- *.amazon.pl Critical
- *.amazon.sa Critical
- *.amazon.se Critical
- *.amazon.sg Critical
- primevideo.com/* Critical
Hardware and IoT 5
- Echo Family Devices Critical
- FireTV Critical
- Kindle E-Reader Critical
- Luna Critical
- Tablets Critical
Web 2
- amazonpayinsurance.in Critical
- www.amazon.* Critical
Products and areas 9
- Amazon Subsidiaries (Please only actively test explicitly stated scope) Critical No bounty
- Devices Informational
- GenAI Apps under *.amazon.* Critical
- https://www.amazonpay.in/* Critical
- Other Amazon Retail Assets (Please only actively test explicitly stated scope) Critical No bounty
- Other Amazon Retail Mobile Apps (Please only actively test explicitly stated scope) Critical No bounty
- Other Amazon Retail Sites (Please only actively test explicitly stated scope) Critical No bounty
- Services/Mobile/GenAI Informational
- Vega OS Critical
Out of scope (10)
- Amazon Web Services (AWS)
- Anything considered a non-prod asset
- Anything which redirects to AWS
- AWS and AWS customer assets are strictly out of scope
- "Contact Us" Functionality
- learning.logistics.amazon.com
- amazongames.com
- *.*a2z*.*
- *.aws.*
- *.dev
Rules
What the policy asks of you, and the bug types it won't reward, quoted from Amazon Vulnerability Research Program (via HackerOne)'s policy. "We" in these lines means the program, not this site.
While testing
-
Create Amazon accounts using a HackerOne email ([email protected]) to help us track security research activity.
-
Limited usage of automated scanners/tools is allowed with above User-Agent applied.
-
Scanners/tools must be configured to not send more than 5 requests per second to a single service.
-
Do not use third party sites (e.g., XSS Hunter variants) when testing.
-
Do not attempt to conduct post-exploitation: modification or destruction of data, interruption or degradation of Amazon services, and pivoting with access not normally granted.
-
Do not attempt to perform actions that could hinder Amazon in serving customers or carrying out other business functions.
-
Do not compromise or test Amazon accounts that are not your own.
-
Do not attempt to target Amazon employees or customers, including social engineering and phishing attacks.
-
Do not perform physical attacks against any Amazon facility or infrastructure.
Not accepted
-
Clickjacking
-
Self-XSS
-
Email spoofing – SPF records misconfiguration
-
Bitflipping, bitsquatting
-
Security practices where other mitigating controls exist (e.g., missing security headers)
-
Social engineering, phishing
-
Physical attacks
-
Missing cookie flags
-
CSRF with minimal impact (e.g., Login CSRF, Logout CSRF)
-
Content spoofing
-
Stack traces, path disclosure, directory listings
-
SSL/TLS controls where other mitigating controls exist
-
Banner grabbing
-
CSV injection
-
Reflected file download
-
Reports on outdated browsers
-
Reports on outdated version/builds of in-scope Mobile Apps
-
Reports on devices running outdated software
-
DoS/DDoS
-
Host header injection without a demonstrable impact
-
Scanner outputs
-
Vulnerabilities in third-party products, services, or assets
-
User enumeration
-
Password complexity
-
HTTP TRACE method
Summarised with AI from the program policy on HackerOne, read 12 Nov 2026, and checked word for word against it. Read the original
Changes
Tracked since 11 Nov 2026. Last checked 1 hour ago.
No changes yet. When the rewards or scope move, you will see it here and in the RSS feed.
Before we tracked it
Scope and reward changes recorded before this page started tracking it.
-
Scope removed
com.amazon.amazonone.androidapp
-
Scope added
Devices
-
Scope added
Services/Mobile/GenAI
-
Scope added
1324809509
-
Scope added
1528364633
-
Scope added
302584613
-
Scope added
621574163
-
Scope added
944011620
-
Scope added
947984433
-
Scope added
com.amazon.clouddrive.photos
-
Scope added
com.amazon.dee.alexaonwearos
-
Scope added
com.amazon.dee.app
-
Scope added
com.amazon.kindle
-
Scope added
com.amazon.storm.lightning.client.aosp
-
Scope added
com.amazon.tahoe.freetime
-
Scope added
com.amazon.tails
-
Scope added
Echo Family Devices
-
Scope added
FireTV
-
Scope added
Kindle E-Reader
-
Scope added
Luna
-
Scope added
Tablets
-
Scope added
Vega OS
-
Scope added
primevideo.com/*
Public CVEs
Published vulnerabilities in this vendor's products, from the NVD.
| CVE | Summary | Severity | Published |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-89332 | Inclusion of functionality from an untrusted control sphere in the Kiro Powers feature in Amazon Kiro IDE before version 0.8.135 might allow remote unauthenticated actors to obtain sensitive information from a developer workstation. Crafted repository content can cause the agent to modify the workspace settings file, which redirects the Kiro Powers registry request to an actor controlled endpoint | Medium 6.7 | 11 Sep 2026 |
| CVE-2026-18061 | Improper restriction of XML external entity references in the RemoteQueryCachePlugin in AWS Advanced JDBC Wrapper 3.3.0 through 4.2.0 might allow an actor with write access to the shared cache infrastructure to disclose sensitive files from application hosts that read cached query results, including stored database and IAM role credentials, via crafted XML data in a cached column value. To remedia | Medium 6.0 | 11 Sep 2026 |
| CVE-2026-81838 | A relative path traversal issue in the zip extraction functionality in AWS diagram-as-code (awsdac) in versions 0.10 through 0.23 can allow a third party to write arbitrary files to the local filesystem via crafted zip entry names containing path traversal sequences. This could allow the third party to perform inappropriate actions in the diagram bundle. To remediate this issue, users should upgra | Medium 6.8 | 27 Aug 2026 |
| CVE-2026-77234 | Improper input validation in FreeRTOS-Kernel before 11.3.1 might allow an unprivileged task on MPU-enabled ports to execute code in privileged kernel context. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 11.3.1 or later. | Critical 9.3 | 21 Aug 2026 |
| CVE-2026-77237 | Missing queue-set type validation in xQueueAddToSet() in the FreeRTOS-Kernel before 11.3.1 might allow an unprivileged task on MPU-enabled ports with configUSE_QUEUE_SETS=1 to read privileged kernel memory. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 11.3.1 or later. | High 8.2 | 21 Aug 2026 |
| CVE-2026-77236 | Missing minimum size validation in secure context allocation in FreeRTOS-Kernel before 11.3.1 might allow local users to corrupt secure-world heap metadata via an out-of-bounds write with an undersized stack size parameter. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 11.3.1 or later. | High 8.3 | 21 Aug 2026 |
| CVE-2026-77235 | Missing privilege verification in the secure context cleanup handler in FreeRTOS-Kernel before 11.3.1 might allow local users to cause a use-after-free condition in secure-world memory via the SVC handler for secure context deallocation. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 11.3.1 or later. | High 8.3 | 21 Aug 2026 |
| CVE-2026-19643 | An out-of-bounds read issue in the Base64 decoder in Amazon aws-sdk-cpp before 1.11.862, on some platforms, might allow a remote authenticated user to crash an application that processes crafted Base64-encoded input. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 1.11.862. | Medium 6.0 | 12 Aug 2026 |
| CVE-2026-19642 | An out-of-bounds write issue in the Base64 decoder in Amazon aws-sdk-cpp before 1.11.862 might allow a remote authenticated user to cause a crash or heap memory corruption in an application that processes crafted Base64-encoded input. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 1.11.862. | Medium 6.0 | 12 Aug 2026 |
| CVE-2026-18953 | Improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory in the get_resource tool in Amazon awslabs.aws-transform-mcp-server 0.1.0 through 0.1.4 might allow a context-dependent actor to write arbitrary files outside the intended working directory via the savePath parameter. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 0.1.5 or later. | Medium 6.3 | 5 Aug 2026 |
| CVE-2026-18954 | Incorrect authorization in the aggregation pipeline tool in Amazon AWS Labs DocumentDB MCP Server before 1.0.12 might allow an authenticated MCP client to perform inappropriate write operations on the connected database via write-capable aggregation pipeline stages that bypass the read-only mode enforcement logic. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 1.0.12 or later. | Medium 5.7 | 5 Aug 2026 |
| CVE-2026-18657 | An uncontrolled search path element in Kiro CLI before version 2.10.0 on Windows might allow a remote unauthenticated actor to execute arbitrary code via a maliciously crafted project directory containing an executable that bypasses workspace trust protections when a local user starts Kiro CLI in the directory. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 2.10.0 or higher. | High 8.5 | 4 Aug 2026 |
| CVE-2026-18656 | An uncontrolled search path element in Kiro IDE before version 1.0.228 on Windows might allow a remote unauthenticated actor to execute arbitrary code via a maliciously crafted project directory containing an executable that bypasses workspace trust protections when a local user opens the directory. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 1.0.228 or higher. | High 8.5 | 4 Aug 2026 |
| CVE-2026-18654 | Key exchange without entity authentication in the EMR SSH helper commands in Amazon AWS CLI before 1.45.28 and AWS CLI v2 before 2.35.3 might allow man-in-the-middle attackers to intercept SSHsessions and file transfers via network positioning between the client and the EMR cluster endpoint. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to AWS CLI v1 1.45.28 or later, or AWS CLI v2 2.35.3 or later | Medium 6.9 | 3 Aug 2026 |
| CVE-2026-18245 | Improper control of code generation in Amazon @aws-amplify/codegen-ui-react before 2.20.6 might allow a remote authenticated user to execute arbitrary code in end-user browsers, developer machines, CI/CD environments, and server-side rendering contexts via crafted Studio component or theme schema values due to insufficient coverage and effectiveness of the input validation introduced for CVE-2025- | Medium 6.4 | 30 Jul 2026 |
| CVE-2026-18140 | Uncontrolled recursion in the unknown-key skip path of the aws-smithy-json runtime crate before 0.62.7, which the smithy-rs code generator invokes from every generated struct deserializer, might allow remote unauthenticated users to cause a denial of service (process abort via stack exhaustion) via a single small HTTP request containing deeply nested JSON to a smithy-rs generated server. To remedi | High 8.7 | 30 Jul 2026 |
| CVE-2026-14265 | Deserialization of untrusted data in the RemoteQueryCachePlugin in Amazon Web Services AWS Advanced JDBC Wrapper 3.3.0 through 4.0.0 might allow an actor with write access to the shared cache infrastructure to execute arbitrary code on application servers that read cached query results via a crafted serialized Java object. The RemoteQueryCachePlugin uses ObjectInputStream without class filtering w | High 7.7 | 1 Jul 2026 |
| CVE-2026-13769 | Overly permissive file permissions in AWS CLI before 1.44.78 (v1) and 2.34.29 (v2) on Unix-like systems where the umask has not been configured to restrict file permissions (the default on most systems) may allow other local users on the same host to read credentials written by certain CLI subcommands (aws codeartifact login, aws iam create-virtual-mfa-device, aws deploy register). To remediate th | Medium 6.8 | 1 Jul 2026 |
| CVE-2026-13762 | Inconsistent interpretation of HTTP/2 requests in Amazon CloudFront with AWS WAF enabled might allow remote actors to bypass AWS WAF managed rule body inspection via crafted HTTP/2 requests that fragment the request body across frames so that only a partial body is inspected. This issue was remediated server-side. No customer action is required. | High 7.9 | 29 Jun 2026 |
| CVE-2026-13763 | Inconsistent interpretation of HTTP/2 requests in AWS Application Load Balancer with AWS WAF enabled might allow remote actors to bypass AWS WAF managed rule body inspection via crafted HTTP/2 requests that fragment the request body across frames so that only a partial body is inspected. This issue only impacts HTTP/2 ALB target groups. To remediate this issue, customers should enable the "Inspect | High 7.9 | 29 Jun 2026 |
| CVE-2026-10591 | Insufficient access control restrictions in the file write tool in Amazon Kiro IDE before version 0.11 might allow remote unauthenticated actors to execute arbitrary commands via crafted instructions that cause writes to execution-sensitive paths (such as .vscode/tasks.json), enabling auto-execution on folder open. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to Kiro IDE version 0.11 or later. | High 8.6 | 2 Jun 2026 |
| CVE-2026-9255 | Missing input source validation in the tool authorization prompt in Kiro CLI before 1.28.0 allows a local attacker to execute arbitrary tools, including shell commands, without user approval by crafting content that is piped to kiro-cli via stdin. We recommend you to upgrade to kiro-cli version 1.28.0 or later. | High 8.4 | 22 May 2026 |
| CVE-2026-7461 | Improper neutralization of inputs used in an OS command in the FSx Windows File Server volume mounting component in Amazon ECS Agent on Windows before version 1.103.0 might allow a remote authenticated threat actor to execute shell commands with SYSTEM privileges on the underlying host via a specially crafted username field in an ECS task definition. This issue requires permissions to register ECS | High 7.5 | 30 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-7426 | Insufficient validation of the prefix length field in IPv6 Router Advertisement processing in FreeRTOS-Plus-TCP before V4.2.6 and V4.4.1 allows an adjacent network actor to cause memory corruption by sending a crafted Router Advertisement with a prefix length value exceeding the maximum valid length, resulting in a heap buffer overflow. Users processing IPv4 RA only are not impacted. To mitigate t | Medium 6.1 | 29 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-7425 | Insufficient option length validation in the IPv6 Router Advertisement parser in FreeRTOS-Plus-TCP before V4.2.6 and V4.4.1 allows an adjacent network actor to cause a denial of service (device crash) by sending a crafted Router Advertisement with a truncated PREFIX_INFORMATION option that is smaller than the expected structure size. To mitigate this issue, users should upgrade to the fixed versio | Medium 6.0 | 29 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-7423 | Integer underflow in the ICMP and ICMPv6 echo reply handlers in FreeRTOS-Plus-TCP before V4.4.1 and V4.2.6 allows an adjacent network user to cause a denial of service (device crash) when outgoing ping support is enabled, because header sizes are subtracted from a packet length field without validating the field is large enough, resulting in a heap out-of-bounds read of up to approximately 65KB. T | Medium 6.0 | 29 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-7424 | Integer underflow in the DHCPv6 sub-option parser in FreeRTOS-Plus-TCP before V4.4.1 and V4.2.6 allows an adjacent network actor to corrupt the device's IPv6 address assignment, DNS configuration, and lease times, and to cause a denial of service (permanent IP task freeze requiring hardware reset) by sending a single crafted DHCPv6 packet. The issue is present whenever DHCPv6 is enabled. To mitiga | High 7.2 | 29 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-7422 | Insufficient packet validation in FreeRTOS-Plus-TCP before V4.2.6 and V4.4.1 allows an adjacent network actor to bypass all checksum and minimum-size validation by spoofing the Ethernet source MAC address to match one of the device's own registered endpoints, because the loopback detection mechanism skips all input validation for packets whose source MAC matches a local endpoint. To mitigate this | High 7.1 | 29 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-6967 | Missing expiration, hash, and length enforcement in delegated metadata validation in awslabs/tough before tough-v0.22.0 allows remote authenticated users with delegated signing authority to bypass TUF specification integrity checks for delegated targets metadata and poison the local metadata cache, because load_delegations does not apply the same validation checks as the top-level targets metadata | High 7.1 | 24 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-6966 | Improper verification of cryptographic signature uniqueness in delegated role validation in awslabs/tough before tough-v0.22.0 allows remote authenticated users to bypass the TUF signature threshold requirement by duplicating a valid signature, causing the client to accept forged delegated role metadata. We recommend you upgrade to tough-v0.22.0 / tuftool-v0.15.0. | High 7.0 | 24 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-6968 | Incomplete path traversal fixes in awslabs/tough before tough-v0.22.0 allow remote authenticated users with delegated signing authority to write files outside intended output directories via absolute target names in copy_target/link_target, symlinked parent directories in save_target, or symlinked metadata filenames in SignedRole::write, because write paths trust the joined destination path withou | High 7.1 | 24 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-31431 | In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: crypto: algif_aead - Revert to operating out-of-place This mostly reverts commit 72548b093ee3 except for the copying of the associated data. There is no benefit in operating in-place in algif_aead since the source and destination come from different mappings. Get rid of all the complexity added for in-place operation and just copy | High 7.8 | 22 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-6437 | Improper neutralization of argument delimiters in the volume handling component in AWS EFS CSI Driver (aws-efs-csi-driver) before v3.0.1 allows remote authenticated users with PersistentVolume creation permissions to inject arbitrary mount options via comma injection. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version v3.0.1 | Medium 6.9 | 17 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-5747 | An out-of-bounds write issue in the virtio PCI transport in Firecracker 1.13.0 through 1.14.3 and 1.15.0 on x86_64 and aarch64 might allow a local guest user with root privileges to crash the Firecracker VMM process or potentially execute arbitrary code on the host via modification of virtio queue configuration registers after device activation. Achieving code execution on the host requires additi | High 8.7 | 8 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-5709 | Unsanitized input in the FileBrowser API in AWS Research and Engineering Studio (RES) version 2024.10 through 2025.12.01 might allow a remote authenticated actor to execute arbitrary commands on the cluster-manager EC2 instance via crafted input when using the FileBrowser functionality. To remediate this issue, users are advised to upgrade to RES version 2026.03 or apply the corresponding mitigati | High 7.7 | 6 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-5708 | Unsanitized control of user-modifiable attributes in the session creation component in AWS Research and Engineering Studio (RES) prior to version 2026.03 could allow an authenticated remote user to escalate privileges, assume the virtual desktop host instance profile permissions, and interact with AWS resources and services via a crafted API request. To remediate this issue, users are advised to u | High 8.7 | 6 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-5707 | Unsanitized input in an OS command in the virtual desktop session name handling in AWS Research and Engineering Studio (RES) version 2025.03 through 2025.12.01 might allow a remote authenticated actor to execute arbitrary commands as root on the virtual desktop host via a crafted session name. To remediate this issue, users are advised to upgrade to RES version 2026.03 or apply the corresponding m | High 8.7 | 6 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-5485 | OS command injection in the browser-based authentication component in Amazon Athena ODBC driver before 2.0.5.1 on Linux might allow a threat actor to execute arbitrary code by using specially crafted connection parameters that are loaded by the driver during a local user-initiated connection. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 2.0.5.1 or later. | High 7.3 | 3 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-35558 | Improper neutralization of special elements in the authentication components in Amazon Athena ODBC driver before 2.1.0.0 might allow a threat actor to execute arbitrary code or redirect authentication flows by using specially crafted connection parameters that are processed by the driver during user-initiated authentication. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 2.1.0.0. | High 7.3 | 3 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-35562 | Allocation of resources without limits in the parsing components in Amazon Athena ODBC driver before 2.1.0.0 might allow a threat actor to cause a denial of service by delivering crafted input that triggers excessive resource consumption during the driver's parsing operations. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 2.1.0.0. | High 8.7 | 3 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-35561 | Insufficient authentication security controls in the browser-based authentication components in Amazon Athena ODBC driver before 2.1.0.0 might allow a threat actor to intercept or hijack authentication sessions due to insufficient protections in the browser-based authentication flows. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 2.1.0.0. | Critical 9.1 | 3 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-35560 | Improper certificate validation in the identity provider connection components in Amazon Athena ODBC driver before 2.1.0.0 might allow a man-in-the-middle threat actor to intercept authentication credentials due to insufficient default transport security when connecting to identity providers. This only applies to connections with external identity providers and does not apply to connections with A | Critical 9.1 | 3 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-35559 | Out-of-bounds write in the query processing components in Amazon Athena ODBC driver before 2.1.0.0 might allow a threat actor to crash the driver by using specially crafted data that is processed by the driver during query operations. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 2.1.0.0. | High 7.1 | 3 Apr 2026 |
| CVE-2026-4269 | A missing S3 ownership verification in the Bedrock AgentCore Starter Toolkit before version v0.1.13 may allow a remote actor to inject code during the build process, leading to code execution in the AgentCore Runtime. This issue only affects users of the Bedrock AgentCore Starter Toolkit before version v0.1.13 who build or have built the Toolkit after September 24, 2025. Any users on a version >=v | Medium 5.8 | 16 Mar 2026 |
| CVE-2026-4270 | Improper Protection of Alternate Path exists in the no-access and workdir feature of the AWS API MCP Server versions >= 0.2.14 and < 1.3.9 on all platforms may allow the bypass of intended file access restriction and expose arbitrary local file contents in the MCP client application context. To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 1.3.9. | Medium 6.8 | 16 Mar 2026 |
| CVE-2026-3494 | In MariaDB server version through 11.8.5, when server audit plugin is enabled with server_audit_events variable configured with QUERY_DCL, QUERY_DDL, or QUERY_DML filtering, if an authenticated database user invokes a SQL statement prefixed with double-hyphen (—) or hash (#) style comments, the statement is not logged. | Medium 5.3 | 3 Mar 2026 |
| CVE-2026-3338 | Improper signature validation in PKCS7_verify() in AWS-LC allows an unauthenticated user to bypass signature verification when processing PKCS7 objects with Authenticated Attributes. Customers of AWS services do not need to take action. Applications using AWS-LC should upgrade to AWS-LC version 1.69.0. | High 8.7 | 2 Mar 2026 |
| CVE-2026-3337 | Observable timing discrepancy in AES-CCM decryption in AWS-LC allows an unauthenticated user to potentially determine authentication tag validity via timing analysis. The impacted implementations are through the EVP CIPHER API: EVP_aes_128_ccm, EVP_aes_192_ccm, and EVP_aes_256_ccm. Customers of AWS services do not need to take action. Applications using AWS-LC should upgrade to AWS-LC version 1.69 | High 8.2 | 2 Mar 2026 |
| CVE-2026-3336 | Improper certificate validation in PKCS7_verify() in AWS-LC allows an unauthenticated user to bypass certificate chain verification when processing PKCS7 objects with multiple signers, except the final signer. Customers of AWS services do not need to take action. Applications using AWS-LC should upgrade to AWS-LC version 1.69.0. | High 8.7 | 2 Mar 2026 |
| CVE-2026-1386 | A UNIX symbolic link following issue in the jailer component in Firecracker version v1.13.1 and earlier and 1.14.0 on Linux may allow a local host user with write access to the pre-created jailer directories to overwrite arbitrary host files via a symlink attack during the initialization copy at jailer startup, if the jailer is executed with root privileges. To mitigate this issue, users should up | Medium 6.0 | 23 Jan 2026 |
| CVE-2026-0830 | Processing specially crafted workspace folder names could allow for arbitrary command injection in the Kiro GitLab Merge-Request helper in Kiro IDE before version 0.6.18 when opening maliciously crafted workspaces. To mitigate, users should update to the latest version. | High 8.4 | 9 Jan 2026 |
| CVE-2025-14503 | An overly-permissive IAM trust policy in the Harmonix on AWS framework may allow IAM principals in the same AWS account to escalate privileges via role assumption. The sample code for the EKS environment provisioning role is configured to trust the account root principal, which may enable any IAM principal in the same AWS account with sts:AssumeRole permissions to assume the role with administrati | High 8.6 | 15 Dec 2025 |
| CVE-2025-9624 | A vulnerability in OpenSearch allows attackers to cause Denial of Service (DoS) by submitting complex query_string inputs. This issue affects all OpenSearch versions between 3.0.0 and < 3.3.0 and OpenSearch < 2.19.4. | High 8.3 | 25 Nov 2025 |
| CVE-2025-62371 | OpenSearch Data Prepper as an open source data collector for observability data. In versions prior to 2.12.2, the OpenSearch sink and source plugins in Data Prepper trust all SSL certificates by default when no certificate path is provided. Prior to this fix, the OpenSearch sink and source plugins would automatically use a trust all SSL strategy when connecting to OpenSearch clusters if no certifi | High 7.4 | 15 Oct 2025 |
| CVE-2025-11616 | A missing validation check in FreeRTOS-Plus-TCP's ICMPv6 packet processing code can lead to an out-of-bounds read when receiving ICMPv6 packets of certain message types which are smaller than the expected size. These issues only affect applications using IPv6. Users should upgrade to the latest version and ensure any forked or derivative code is patched to incorporate the new fixes. | Medium 5.3 | 10 Oct 2025 |
| CVE-2025-11618 | A missing validation check in FreeRTOS-Plus-TCP's UDP/IPv6 packet processing code can lead to an invalid pointer dereference when receiving a UDP/IPv6 packet with an incorrect IP version field in the packet header. This issue only affects applications using IPv6. We recommend upgrading to the latest version and ensure any forked or derivative code is patched to incorporate the new fixes. | Medium 5.3 | 10 Oct 2025 |
| CVE-2025-11617 | A missing validation check in FreeRTOS-Plus-TCP's IPv6 packet processing code can lead to an out-of-bounds read when receiving a IPv6 packet with incorrect payload lengths in the packet header. This issue only affects applications using IPv6. We recommend users upgrade to the latest version and ensure any forked or derivative code is patched to incorporate the new fixes. | Medium 5.3 | 10 Oct 2025 |
| CVE-2025-20286 | A vulnerability in Amazon Web Services (AWS), Microsoft Azure, and Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) cloud deployments of Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to access sensitive data, execute limited administrative operations, modify system configurations, or disrupt services within the impacted systems. This vulnerability exists because credentials | Critical 9.9 | 4 Jun 2025 |
| CVE-2025-2887 | During a target rollback, the client fails to detect the rollback for delegated targets. This could cause the client to fetch a target from an incorrect source, altering the target contents. Users should upgrade to tough version 0.20.0 or later and ensure any forked or derivative code is patched to incorporate the new fixes. | Medium 5.7 | 27 Mar 2025 |
| CVE-2025-2888 | During a snapshot rollback, the client incorrectly caches the timestamp metadata. If the client checks the cache when attempting to perform the next update, the update timestamp validation will fail, preventing the next update until the cache is cleared. Users should upgrade to tough version 0.20.0 or later and ensure any forked or derivative code is patched to incorporate the new fixes. | Medium 5.7 | 27 Mar 2025 |
Original policy
Copied from hackerone.com on 12 Nov 2026. The summaries on this page are made from it; the live page may have changed since.
Amazon Vulnerability Research Program (VRP) - Program Policy (8/13/2026)
Introduction
At Amazon, we take security and privacy very seriously. If you believe that you have found a security vulnerability that affects any Amazon product or service, please report it to us. Reports that fall within the scope of Amazon’s Vulnerability Research Program (VRP) are eligible for a reward. We appreciate your efforts in helping protect customer trust and make Amazon more secure.
Other Amazon Programs
Please submit reports for suspected vulnerabilities relating to AWS, Ring and eero via:
What is VRP?
VRP is a security research initiative driven by Amazon's Stores Security Bug Bounty Team.
Who Can Participate in VRP?
Anyone who discovers a potential security finding within Amazon products or services can report it to VRP, with the following exceptions:
-
Amazon employees and contractors, as well as their immediate family members (e.g., parent, sibling, spouse, child) are strictly prohibited from participating in VRP. Amazon employees and contractors may not share information with a third party to bypass this prohibition or otherwise enable another person to participate in VRP.
-
Residents of any countries/regions that are subject to United States sanctions, such as Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, and Syria or Crimea, and any person designated on the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Specially Designated Nationals List are strictly prohibited from participating in VRP.
You must be 18 or older to be eligible for a reward.
How VRP Works
Security researchers and Amazon customers are encouraged to report any behavior impacting the information security posture of Amazon products and services. Document your findings thoroughly. For a quicker response, submit a report with complete details, including steps to reproduce the issue and screenshots or videos. We will contact you to confirm receipt of your report and attempt to reproduce your research. We will work with internal teams to validate the report, contain and remediate vulnerabilities, and make other improvements. Amazon will issue rewards for validated findings if they are eligible under this Policy. To be eligible for rewards, reports must comply with all parts of this Policy, and you must be the first to report the issue to Amazon.
Qualified researchers who regularly submit high-quality findings may be added to the Amazon Private Program (invited researchers only).
How to Conduct Testing
-
Accounts. Use the User-Agent string
amazonvrpresearcher_yourh1usernamewhile testing. Create Amazon accounts using a HackerOne email ([email protected]) to help us track security research activity. You can create match and replace proxy rules in Burp by going to Proxy >> Options >> Match and Replace with the following options: Type: Request header Match: ^User-Agent.*$ Replace: User-Agent: amazonvrpresearcher_yourh1username. -
Banned/Blocked Accounts. If your Amazon account is banned because of good faith research activity, log into the account and follow the on-screen instructions. Be prepared with a recent payment card statement, which may be necessary to prove ownership. Use a valid payment method to avoid account blocks. Restoration typically takes 24 hours. If your account is not reinstated, create a new one.
-
Scanning. Limited usage of automated scanners/tools is allowed with above User-Agent applied. Scanners/tools must be configured to not send more than 5 requests per second to a single service. Use of scanning tools without the User-agent string amazonvrpresearcher_yourh1username may result in your account/IP getting blocked by automated protections. It will take time to reinstate blocked accounts and delay your research.
-
SSRF Testing. You can use bugbounty-sheriff.aka.amazon.com (port 443) for testing SSRF issues. SSRF sheriff is installed on this server, and it supports HTTPS.
To validate dependency confusion issues, use the following command in the "preinstall" field in the package.json file:curl https://bugbounty-sheriff.aka.amazon.com/foobar -e '<package-name>+<hackerone-alias>. We will review logs to verify a successful hit, so be sure to include your alias in the command to allow Amazon to identify your hit. -
Third Party Sites. Do not use third party sites (e.g., XSS Hunter variants) when testing. When conducting blind XSS or other testing, only use assets that you own and control yourself. For example, using a home-forked version of the xsshunter-express repo is permitted. Make sure that all traffic goes through domains only you have control over. Testing using third party infrastructure could expose discovered issues or other sensitive data to third parties and may result in ineligibility for any reward.
-
Subdomain Takeovers. Prove control by serving an HTML file at a hidden/non-root path containing your HackerOne username in an HTML comment. Do not publish content at the index path or simulate downstream attacks.
How to Submit a Report
-
Identify the Asset. Use *.amazon.* for the HackerOne general asset field unless the asset is specifically mentioned as a scope item. Copy and paste the URL that pertains to your report next to Asset URL:.
-
Required Detail. Include as much information as you can to help Amazon address issues and issue rewards quickly.
-
Bypass Reports. If you find a bypass of a previous report you’ve created, create a new report. Include the ID of the original finding under Custom Field Bypass Reference to help with secondary data tracking.
-
Validation Assistance. We may contact you with questions or requests for clarification to help Amazon validate, reproduce, investigate, or remediate an issue you submit. You must provide this additional information to be eligible for a reward.
HackerOne provides guidance on how to write quality reports:
Rules of Engagement
-
Only Test In-Scope Assets & Vulnerabilities. If an asset is not associated with a domain or product identified as in-scope in this Policy, do not test it as part of VRP. Only test for eligible vulnerabilities. Do not test for ineligible vulnerabilities or other out-of-scope issues.
-
Avoid and Immediately Report Safety Issues. If you identify an issue in a physical system (e.g., robotics, an autonomous vehicle, a satellite), do not attempt to change physical state or degrade, disrupt, or interfere with service availability or stability. If you believe you have found an issue that could impact safety, mission-critical operations, or service availability at scale, immediately stop testing and report the issue to us, even if your report is incomplete or the affected system is not authorized for testing. Do not attempt further validation. We will work with you to validate safely.
-
Minimize Access and Delete Information. Conduct the minimum testing needed to validate an issue. Do not attempt to execute instructions that may directly or visibly alert other people to your activity or that may access, modify, or delete other people’s accounts or data. Delete any retained data from your devices upon request from Amazon or after a reward decision has been made. If the vulnerability or your testing causes a public and readily visible issue, immediately report the issue to us, even if your report is incomplete.
-
No Post-Exploitation Actions. Do not attempt to conduct post-exploitation: modification or destruction of data, interruption or degradation of Amazon services, and pivoting with access not normally granted.
-
No Denial of Service. Do not attempt to perform actions that could hinder Amazon in serving customers or carrying out other business functions. This includes brute-force, denial-of-service (DoS/DDoS), and other similar attacks or techniques.
-
No Account Takeovers. Do not compromise or test Amazon accounts that are not your own. You are not authorized to access or otherwise interact with other people's accounts or data. If you discover an issue that could allow you to bypass an authentication control and gain access to another account, report it but do not access the account or its data or take other further action.
-
No Accessing Others’ Data. If you encounter personal data that is not your own during research, immediately stop and report the issue. In your report, include information about what information was accessed. Do not save, copy, transfer, or otherwise use the personal data. If you have already inadvertently transferred or copied the data to a system you own or control, delete it. Retaining or continuing to access another person’s data will be regarded as evidence of a lack of good faith, resulting in ineligibility for any reward and inapplicability of this Policy’s Legal Safe Harbor.
-
No Graphic Material. Do not attempt to generate sexually explicit images, extremely graphic or violent images, or Child Sex Abuse Material (CSAM) using Amazon products. While ineligible for a reward, you can responsibly disclose related issues to Amazon if you inadvertently encounter graphic materials during testing. If you make such a report, do not include copies of the graphic material. Amazon will not review graphic material if submitted, and it may be illegal to possess.
-
No Social Engineering. Do not attempt to target Amazon employees or customers, including social engineering and phishing attacks. Do not perform any testing against assets that involves directly engaging in communication with Amazon personnel, including support chats, even if they appear to be automated—or Contact Us pages.
-
No Physical or Wireless Attacks. Do not perform physical attacks against any Amazon facility or infrastructure. Do not transmit, jam, spoof, interfere with, or intentionally manipulate any radio communications (including satellite, cellular, GPS/GNSS, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or other wireless signals).
-
No Breaking the Law. Don’t do anything illegal or unethical. You are responsible for complying with all applicable laws, regulations, and other restrictions. You also must abide by the HackerOne Code of Conduct.
Violation of these Rules of Engagement may result in loss of bounty eligibility, or further, disqualification from participation in VRP at Amazon’s discretion. Amazon may update this Policy, including the scope of VRP and these Rules of Engagement, from time to time.
Responsible Disclosure
By participating in VRP, you agree not to share publicly or privately any details or descriptions of your findings with any third party. You also agree not to attempt to threaten or extort Amazon.
Amazon commits to timely triage of reports, remediation of verified findings, and response to relevant questions.
Out-of-Scope Assets
AWS and AWS customer assets are strictly out of scope, as are some corporate and non-production assets. Never test:
-
Anything with aws in the subdomain
-
Zoox autonomous vehicles and autonomous driving technology
-
Amazon Leo satellite command-and-control or other operational control paths
-
Anything that is .a2z
-
Anything that redirects to midway-auth.amazon.com
-
Anything that ends with *.dev
-
Anything that redirects to AWS
-
Anything that is non-production asset (e.g. - test, qa, integ, preprod, gamma, beta, user-aliases, regions)
Security issues discovered in the AWS IP Space (https://ip-ranges.amazonaws.com/ip-ranges.json) are not in scope for VRP. AWS customers operate assets in this space. Discovering and testing against AWS and AWS customer assets is strictly out of scope for VRP and may violate the AWS Acceptable Use Policy (https://aws.amazon.com/aup/).
Note that Shodan may indicate an affiliation with Amazon for AWS customers, and should not be used to determine whether an asset is owned by Amazon.
Unless specifically identified in this Policy, all Amazon subsidiary businesses (e.g., Twitch) and their assets are out of scope. Security issues related to Amazon’s physical stores, including Whole Foods Market and its mobile applications, are out of scope.
You are not authorized to test any asset, domain, or IP address outside the scope of VRP. If you become aware of an out-of-scope vulnerability, you may report the security finding for our review, but it may be ineligible for rewards.
In-Scope Assets
Please see the Scope tab for complete details on current in-scope assets. In general, bounty-eligible findings are limited to the following marketplaces and mobile apps:
-
All retail marketplaces (wildcard scoped, i.e., *.amazon)
-
amazon.com (United States)
-
amazon.co.uk (UK)
-
amazon.in (India)
-
amazon.de (Germany)
-
amazon.fr (France)
-
amazon.co.jp (Japan)
-
amazon.ca (Canada)
-
amazon.cn (China)
-
amazon.it (Italy)
-
amazon.es (Spain)
-
amazon.nl (Netherlands)
-
amazon.ae (United Arab Emirates)
-
amazon.sg (Singapore)
-
amazon.se (Sweden)
-
amazon.sa (Saudi Arabia)
-
amazon.eg (Egypt)
-
amazon.pl (Poland)
-
amazon.com.au (Australia)
-
amazon.com.tr (Turkey)
-
amazon.com.br (Brazil)
-
amazon.com.mx (Mexico)
-
amazon.com.be (Belgium)
-
amazon.co.za (South Africa)
-
amazon.com.ng (Nigeria)
-
amazon.com.co (Colombia)
-
amazon.cl (Chile)
-
-
Android and iOS Apps – Retail & Shopping
- MShop (Android: com.amazon.mShop.android.shopping; iOS: amazon-shopping-297606951)
-
Android and iOS Apps – Device Companions
-
FreeTime (Android: com.amazon.tahoe.freetime; iOS:1324809509)
-
Alexa Companion App (Android: com.amazon.dee.app; iOS: 944011620)
-
FireTV (Bison) (Android: com.amazon.storm.lightning.client.aosp; iOS: 947984433)
-
Kindle (Android: com.amazon.kindle; iOS: 302584613)
-
Amazon Photos (Android: com.amazon.clouddrive.photos; iOS: 621574163)
-
Amazon Key (Android: com.amazon.cosmos; iOS: 1291586307)
-
Amazon Luna (Android: com.amazon.tails; iOS: 1528364633)
-
-
Amazon Devices: Fire devices and tablets, Echo, Kindle, Blink, Alexa, and Luna Gaming devices (running latest available software)
-
Device-Related Web Applications
-
developer.amazon.com/alexa/* (Alexa Developer)
-
developer.amazon.com/apps-and-games/* (Amazon App Store)
-
alexa.amazon.com (Alexa Web)
-
skills-store.amazon.com (Skills Store)
-
read.amazon.com (Kindle Cloud Reader)
-
kdp.amazon.com (Kindle Publishing)
-
alexaanswers.amazon.com (Alexa Answers)
-
blueprints.amazon.com (Alexa BluePrints)
-
creator.amazon.com (Amazon FireTV App Creator)
-
amazon.com/hz/mycd/* (Device Content Manager)
-
amazon.com/photos (Amazon Photos)
-
luna.amazon.com (Amazon Luna)
-
api.amazonalexa.com (Alexa API)
-
Device Software Update Reference. Only devices running the latest available software are considered in-scope. The latest available software may be found here:
In-Scope Security Issues
The following is a non-exhaustive list of common in-scope security issues and the usual severity range.
| Vulnerability | Severity Range | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Remote Code Execution | Critical |
| 2 | SQL Injection | High - Critical |
| 3 | XXE | High - Critical |
| 4 | XSS | High - Critical |
| 5 | Server-Side Request Forgery | Medium - Critical |
| 6 | Directory Traversal - Local File Inclusion | Medium - High |
| 7 | Authentication/Authorization Bypass (Broken Access Control) | Medium - High |
| 8 | Privilege Escalation | Medium - High |
| 9 | Insecure Direct Object Reference | Medium - High |
| 10 | Misconfiguration | Low - High |
| 11 | Web Cache Deception | Low - Medium |
| 12 | CORS Misconfiguration | Low - Medium |
| 13 | CRLF Injection | Low - Medium |
| 14 | Cross Site Request Forgery | Low - Medium |
| 15 | Open Redirect | Low - Medium |
| 16 | Information Disclosure | Low - Medium |
| 17 | Request Smuggling | Low – Medium |
| 18 | Mixed Content | Low |
Fraud and Abuse. Fraud and abuse reports may, in our discretion, be reward-eligible if they indicate substantial impact, are clear and concise, and result in action by Amazon. Reports should describe realistic, unique, and systemic behavior in detail that is not reliant on contrived scenarios but based on realizable human behavior at scale.
Zero Days. Reports of zero-day vulnerabilities (vulnerabilities that were not previously known to the security community) within in-scope services and products will be eligible for a reward at Amazon’s discretion if the issue has not previously been identified by another researcher or the report provides significant insight that assists Amazon with remediation efforts.
Devices. Issues demonstrated with Android Debug Bridge (ADB) are generally accepted only if ADB is used to demonstrate a behavior that is possible to implement in an app. Severity will generally be assessed according to these criteria:
-
Critical: Remote threat actor can gain device control or cause permanent failure. For example: secure boot bypass, arbitrary code execution, remote access to sensitive credentials/tokens (e.g., Amazon account), or permanent device failure even after factory reset.
-
High: Local threat actor can bypass critical security controls or brick device. For example: temporary bypass of critical security controls; arbitrary code execution in unprivileged processes or privileged processes with user interaction; local access to sensitive data; bypass of mandatory access controls, sandboxing, or user interaction requirements; permanent device failure requiring factory reset (local access vector) or temporary failure (remote access vector).
-
Medium: Local threat actor can cause temporary device failure or expose sensitive information through physical access (additional vulnerabilities or user interaction would be required to achieve High-level impacts). For example: temporary device failure requiring factory reset; protocol weaknesses allowing sensitive information observation via physical access; exploit mitigation bypasses.
-
Low: Little or no direct security impact. For example: bypasses of non-security features (e.g., parental controls) with no security implications.
In-Scope LLM/GenAI Issues
For any reports related to generative AI, please include as much of the following information as you can: timestamp, IP address, consumed content or prompt string, responses, and security impact.
The following is a list of in-scope security issues related to generative AI and the usual severity range.
| Potential Vulnerabilities | Severity | Comments |
|---|---|---|
| Unauthorized access/disclosure of PII/PHI data | High-Critical | Severity will be dependent on the context and influencing factors. |
| Cross customer sensitive data access | High-Critical | Severity will be dependent on the context and influencing factors. |
| Unauthorized system or environment changes | High-Critical | Severity will be dependent on the context and influencing factors. |
| Model Theft and LLM training data poisoning | High-Critical | Depending on the overall impact and application context. |
| Adversaries can retrieve personal customer data without consent | High-Critical | Severity will be dependent on the context and influencing factors. |
| Information Disclosure | Low-Critical | Severity will be dependent on the context and influencing factors. |
| Prompt Injection | Medium – Critical | Severity will be dependent on the context and influencing factors. Please make sure to read notes above |
| Insecure Output Handling | Medium-Critical | Impact will depend on resulting potential vulnerabilities like HTML injection, XSS, SSRF, RCE etc. |
| Insecure plugins impacting models | Medium-High | Depending on the impact like content injection, code execution, differential error responses, system data exfiltration, |
| Excessive functionality, permissions and autonomy | Low-High | Depending on the actions allowed by excessive agency issues |
| Response manipulation providing guidance to customers | Medium-High | Severity will be dependent on the context and the guidance. |
| Adversaries can perform unauthorized actions on behalf of users | Medium-Critical | Depending on the impact, ease and issue radius. |
| LLM vulnerable to solicitation and social engineering | Medium-High | Depending on the overall impact and application context. |
| In context data could be used to de-anonymize users | Medium | Severity will be dependent on the context and influencing factors. |
| Absent customer API or data opt out mechanisms | Medium | Severity will be dependent on the context and influencing factors. |
| Command Injection | High-Critical | Depending on the impact, ease and issue radius. |
| API Auth Bypass | High-Critical | Depending on the impact, ease and issue radius. |
| Runtime Information Disclosure | Low-Medium | Severity will be dependent on the context and influencing factors. |
Amazon will confirm validity and severity of the issues on a case-by-case basis. Issue severity and bounty amount are discretionary, as evaluated by Amazon.
Out-of-Scope Issues
- Security Issues. The following are not eligible for rewards under VRP:
-
Clickjacking
-
Self-XSS
-
Email spoofing – SPF records misconfiguration
-
Bitflipping, bitsquatting
-
Security practices where other mitigating controls exist (e.g., missing security headers)
-
Social engineering, phishing
-
Physical attacks
-
Missing cookie flags
-
CSRF with minimal impact (e.g., Login CSRF, Logout CSRF)
-
Content spoofing
-
Stack traces, path disclosure, directory listings
-
SSL/TLS controls where other mitigating controls exist
-
Banner grabbing
-
CSV injection
-
Reflected file download
-
Reports on outdated browsers
-
Reports on outdated version/builds of in-scope Mobile Apps
-
Reports on devices running outdated software
-
DoS/DDoS
-
Host header injection without a demonstrable impact
-
Scanner outputs
-
Vulnerabilities in third-party products, services, or assets
-
User enumeration
-
Password complexity
-
HTTP TRACE method
-
GenAI Issues. Reports related to the generative AI prompt response content are out of scope where there is no clear application security impact. Responsible AI issues are out of scope and ineligible for a reward without a direct security impact. Examples of out-of-scope issues include generation of inappropriate text/visual content with the model, inappropriate suggestions from the model, and malicious code generation. Any issues which are result of model hallucinations are out of scope as well.
-
Amazon Account Issues. For issues related to your personal use of an Amazon product or service such as suspicious orders, password changes, account changes, or potential fraud, contact Customer Service.
-
Copyright Infringement. For issues related to copyright infringement, please use Amazon’s Report Infringement Form.
-
Operational Security Issues. We do not reward but will accept reports related to operational security, including leaked Amazon personnel passwords, leaked business documents, and similar issues. These reports will receive only reputation points.
Legal Points
-
Limited Safe Harbor. Amazon will not bring any legal action against anyone who makes a good faith effort to comply with this Policy, or for any accidental or good faith violation of this Policy. If you comply with this Policy:
-
Amazon considers your security research to be "authorized" and lawful under the U.S. Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), and similar laws in the United States and other jurisdictions. This limited authorization does not provide you with authorization to access company data or another person’s account.
-
Amazon waives any restrictions in its applicable Terms of Service and Acceptable Use Policy that would prohibit your participation in VRP in accordance with the terms of, for the limited purpose of your security research under, this Policy.
-
If legal action is initiated by a third party against you in connection with activities conducted under this Policy, Amazon will take steps to make it known that your actions were conducted in compliance with this Policy.
-
Amazon cannot authorize any activity on third-party systems or assets or guarantee that those third parties won’t pursue legal action against you. Amazon is not responsible for your liability from actions performed on third-party systems or assets. Amazon is not responsible if you commit a crime during our testing and is not able to prevent criminal liability.
-
-
Privacy. To protect your privacy, Amazon will not, unless served with legal process or to address a violation of this Policy, share your personal data with third parties or share your HackerOne points or participation without your permission. If your report relates to an issue with a third party’s products, services, or assets, we may report your contact information and findings to the relevant third party.
-
Rewards Discretionary. This is an experimental and discretionary rewards program. You should understand that we can cancel the program at any time and have sole and complete discretion on reward decisions.