- Top reward
- $10,000
- Top severity paid
- Critical
- Assets in scope
- 2
- Public CVEs
- 33
- Last change
At a glance
What to know before you start testing.
- Pays up to $10,000
- for critical bugs.
- Report on HackerOne
- Submit through the program page.
- Full safe harbor
- Good-faith research is authorised; no legal action.
- Publish after a fix
- Coordinate the timing with the company.
Rewards
What HackerOne lists as the payout for each severity.
| Severity | Relative size | Reward |
|---|---|---|
| Critical |
|
$10,000 |
| High |
|
$5,000 |
| Medium |
|
$2,000 |
| Low |
|
$250 |
- Safe harbor
-
Full
Extend Safe Harbor for your vulnerability research that is related to 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
2 assets you may test, 16 excluded.
Products and areas 2
- Any public cloud (e.g. Amazon AWS, Microsoft Azure) resource or infrastructure operated and managed by Palantir. Critical
- Any public (Internet-facing) infrastructure owned and operated by Palantir. Critical
Out of scope (16)
- Any infrastructure or assets related to Silk, FancyThat, or other Palantir acquisitions.
- https://github.com/palantir/*
- blog.palantir.com
- certification.palantir.com
- community.palantir.com
- explore.palantir.com
- gear.palantir.com
- go.palantir.com
- info.palantir.com
- investors.palantir.com
- learn.palantir.com
- palantirfedstart.com
- palantirpacusa.com
- sandbox.training.palantir.com
- store.palantir.com
- training.palantir.com
Rules
What the policy asks of you, and the bug types it won't reward, quoted from Palantir Public (via HackerOne)'s policy. "We" in these lines means the program, not this site.
While testing
-
Do not access, modify, destroy, save, transmit, alter, transfer, use or view data belonging to anyone other than yourself.
-
If a vulnerability provides unintended access to data, please cease testing, purge local information, and submit a report immediately.
-
Keep the details of any discovered vulnerabilities confidential, according to the Disclosure Policy.
-
Use only the official channels designated (see “Reporting”) to discuss vulnerability information with us.
-
Perform testing only on in-scope systems, and respect systems and activities which are out-of-scope.
-
Do not engage in extortion, threats, or other tactics designed to elicit a response under duress.
-
Do not engage in repeated submission of rejected, low-quality, or automated vulnerability reports.
-
Include detailed information, including the process of replication, for the security issue in question.
Not accepted
-
Reports generated from automated vulnerability assessment tools.
-
Reports of missing “best practices” or other guidelines which do not indicate a security issue.
-
Missing cookie flags on non-sensitive cookies.
-
Reports of insecure SSL/TLS ciphers (unless accompanied with working proof of concept).
-
Reports of how you can learn whether a given client can authenticate to a Palantir product or service.
-
Reports of mappings between code names and client names.
-
Reports of simple IP or port scanning.
-
Missing HTTP headers (e.g. lack of HSTS).
-
Email security best practices or controls (e.g. SPF, DKIM, DMARC).
-
Software or infrastructure bannering, fingerprinting, or reconnaissance with no proven vulnerability.
-
Clickjacking or self-XSS reports.
-
Reports of publicly resolvable or accessible DNS records for internal hosts or infrastructure.
-
Reports of user-provided remote code execution in sandboxed environments (e.g., Product Features).
-
Domain-based phishing, typosquatting, punycodes, bitflips, or other techniques.
-
Publicly-disclosed vulnerabilities which have already been reported to Palantir or are already known to the wider security community.
-
Reports of security issues already known and tracked by the Palantir information security team.
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 added
https://github.com/palantir/* (out of scope)
Public CVEs
Published vulnerabilities in this vendor's products, from the NVD.
| CVE | Summary | Severity | Published |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2023-30970 | Gotham Table service and Forward App were found to be vulnerable to a Path traversal issue allowing an authenticated user to read arbitrary files on the file system. | Medium 6.5 | 29 Jan 2024 |
| CVE-2023-30954 | The Gotham video-application-server service contained a race condition which would cause it to not apply certain acls new videos if the source system had not yet initialized. | Low 2.7 | 15 Nov 2023 |
| CVE-2023-30967 | Gotham Orbital-Simulator service prior to 0.692.0 was found to be vulnerable to a Path traversal issue allowing an unauthenticated user to read arbitrary files on the file system. | Critical 9.8 | 26 Oct 2023 |
| CVE-2023-30969 | The Palantir Tiles1 service was found to be vulnerable to an API wide issue where the service was not performing authentication/authorization on all the endpoints. | High 8.2 | 26 Oct 2023 |
| CVE-2023-30959 | In Apollo change requests, comments added by users could contain a javascript URI link that when rendered will result in an XSS that require user interaction. | Medium 4.1 | 27 Sep 2023 |
| CVE-2023-30961 | Palantir Gotham was found to be vulnerable to a bug where under certain circumstances, the frontend could have applied an incorrect classification to a newly created property or link. | Medium 6.5 | 27 Sep 2023 |
| CVE-2023-30962 | The Gotham Cerberus service was found to have a stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that could have allowed an attacker with access to Gotham to launch attacks against other users. This vulnerability is resolved in Cerberus 100.230704.0-27-g031dd58 . | Medium 6.8 | 12 Sep 2023 |
| CVE-2023-30950 | The foundry campaigns service was found to be vulnerable to an unauthenticated information disclosure in a rest endpoint | Medium 6.5 | 3 Aug 2023 |
| CVE-2023-30951 | The Foundry Magritte plugin rest-source was found to be vulnerable to an an XML external Entity attack (XXE). | Medium 6.3 | 3 Aug 2023 |
| CVE-2023-30952 | A security defect was discovered in Foundry Issues that enabled users to create convincing phishing links by editing the request sent when creating an Issue. This defect was resolved in Frontend release 6.228.0 . | Medium 5.0 | 3 Aug 2023 |
| CVE-2023-30949 | A missing origin validation in Slate sandbox could be exploited by a malicious user to modify the page's content, which could lead to phishing attacks. | Medium 4.3 | 26 Jul 2023 |
| CVE-2023-30956 | A security defect was identified in Foundry Comments that enabled a user to discover the contents of an attachment submitted to another comment if they knew the internal UUID of the target attachment. This defect was resolved with the release of Foundry Comments 2.267.0. | Medium 5.3 | 10 Jul 2023 |
| CVE-2023-30960 | A security defect was discovered in Foundry job-tracker that enabled users to query metadata related to builds on resources they did not have access to. This defect was resolved with the release of job-tracker 4.645.0. The service was rolled out to all affected Foundry instances. No further intervention is required. | Medium 4.3 | 10 Jul 2023 |
| CVE-2023-30963 | A security defect was discovered in Foundry Frontend which enabled users to perform Stored XSS attacks in Slate if Foundry's CSP were to be bypassed. This defect was resolved with the release of Foundry Frontend 6.229.0. The service was rolled out to all affected Foundry instances. No further intervention is required. | Medium 5.4 | 10 Jul 2023 |
| CVE-2023-22835 | A security defect was identified that enabled a user of Foundry Issues to perform a Denial of Service attack by submitting malformed data in an Issue that caused loss of frontend functionality to all issue participants. This defect was resolved with the release of Foundry Issues 2.510.0 and Foundry Frontend 6.228.0. | High 7.7 | 10 Jul 2023 |
| CVE-2023-30946 | A security defect was identified in Foundry Issues. If a user was added to an issue on a resource that they did not have access to and consequently could not see, they could query Foundry's Notification API and receive metadata about the issue including the RID of the issue, severity, internal UUID of the author, and the user-defined title of the issue. | Low 3.5 | 29 Jun 2023 |
| CVE-2023-30955 | A security defect was identified in Foundry workspace-server that enabled a user to bypass an authorization check and view settings related to 'Developer Mode'. This enabled users with insufficient privilege the ability to view and interact with Developer Mode settings in a limited capacity. A fix was deployed with workspace-server 7.7.0. | Medium 4.3 | 29 Jun 2023 |
| CVE-2023-22834 | The Contour Service was not checking that users had permission to create an analysis for a given dataset. This could allow an attacker to clutter up Compass folders with extraneous analyses, that the attacker would otherwise not have permission to create. | Low 2.7 | 27 Jun 2023 |
| CVE-2023-30945 | Multiple Services such as VHS(Video History Server) and VCD(Video Clip Distributor) and Clips2 were discovered to be vulnerable to an unauthenticated arbitrary file read/write vulnerability due to missing input validation on filenames. A malicious attacker could read sensitive files from the filesystem or write/delete arbitrary files on the filesystem as well. | Critical 9.8 | 26 Jun 2023 |
| CVE-2023-22833 | Palantir Foundry deployments running Lime2 versions between 2.519.0 and 2.532.0 were vulnerable a bug that allowed authenticated users within a Foundry organization to bypass discretionary or mandatory access controls under certain circumstances. | High 7.6 | 6 Jun 2023 |
| CVE-2023-30948 | A security defect in Foundry's Comments functionality resulted in the retrieval of attachments to comments not being gated by additional authorization checks. This could enable an authenticated user to inject a prior discovered attachment UUID into other arbitrary comments to discover it's content. This defect was fixed in Foundry Comments 2.249.0, and a patch was rolled out to affected Foundry en | Medium 6.5 | 6 Jun 2023 |
| CVE-2022-27890 | It was discovered that the sls-logging was not verifying hostnames in TLS certificates due to a misuse of the javax.net.ssl.SSLSocketFactory API. A malicious attacker in a privileged network position could abuse this to perform a man-in-the-middle attack. A successful man-in-the-middle attack would allow them to intercept, read, or modify network communications to and from the affected service. In | Medium 6.3 | 16 Feb 2023 |
| CVE-2022-27891 | Palantir Gotham included an unauthenticated endpoint that listed all active usernames on the stack with an active session. The affected services have been patched and automatically deployed to all Apollo-managed Gotham instances. It is highly recommended that customers upgrade all affected services to the latest version. This issue affects: Palantir Gotham versions prior to 103.30221005.0. | Medium 5.3 | 16 Feb 2023 |
| CVE-2022-27892 | Palantir Gotham versions prior to 3.22.11.2 included an unauthenticated endpoint that would have allowed an attacker to exhaust the memory of the Gotham dispatch service. | Medium 5.3 | 16 Feb 2023 |
| CVE-2022-27897 | Palantir Gotham versions prior to 3.22.11.2 included an unauthenticated endpoint that would load portions of maliciously crafted zip files to memory. An attacker could repeatedly upload a malicious zip file, which would allow them to exhaust memory resources on the dispatch server. | Medium 5.3 | 16 Feb 2023 |
| CVE-2022-48306 | Improper Validation of Certificate with Host Mismatch vulnerability in Gotham Chat IRC helper of Palantir Gotham allows A malicious attacker in a privileged network position could abuse this to perform a man-in-the-middle attack. A successful man-in-the-middle attack would allow them to intercept, read, or modify network communications to and from the affected service. This issue affects: Palantir | Medium 5.7 | 16 Feb 2023 |
| CVE-2022-48307 | It was discovered that the Magritte-ftp was not verifying hostnames in TLS certificates due to a misuse of the javax.net.ssl.SSLSocketFactory API. A malicious attacker in a privileged network position could abuse this to perform a man-in-the-middle attack. A successful man-in-the-middle attack would allow them to intercept, read, or modify network communications to and from the affected service. I | Medium 6.3 | 16 Feb 2023 |
| CVE-2022-48308 | It was discovered that the sls-logging was not verifying hostnames in TLS certificates due to a misuse of the javax.net.ssl.SSLSocketFactory API. A malicious attacker in a privileged network position could abuse this to perform a man-in-the-middle attack. A successful man-in-the-middle attack would allow them to intercept, read, or modify network communications to and from the affected service. | Medium 6.3 | 16 Feb 2023 |
| CVE-2022-27895 | Information Exposure Through Log Files vulnerability discovered in Foundry when logs were captured using an underlying library known as Build2. This issue was present in versions earlier than 1.785.0. Upgrade to Build2 version 1.785.0 or greater. | Medium 4.2 | 15 Nov 2022 |
| CVE-2022-27896 | Information Exposure Through Log Files vulnerability discovered in Foundry Code-Workbooks where the endpoint backing that console was generating service log records of any Python code being run. These service logs included the Foundry token that represents the Code-Workbooks Python console. Upgrade to Code-Workbooks version 4.461.0. This issue affects Palantir Foundry Code-Workbooks version 4.144 | Medium 4.2 | 14 Nov 2022 |
| CVE-2022-27894 | The Foundry Blobster service was found to have a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability that could have allowed an attacker with access to Foundry to launch attacks against other users. This vulnerability is resolved in Blobster 3.228.0. | Medium 4.8 | 4 Nov 2022 |
| CVE-2022-27889 | The Multipass service was found to have code paths that could be abused to cause a denial of service for authentication or authorization operations. A malicious attacker could perform an application-level denial of service attack, potentially causing authentication and/or authorization operations to fail for the duration of the attack. This could lead to performance degradation or login failures f | Medium 5.3 | 14 Jun 2022 |
| CVE-2022-27888 | Foundry Issues service versions 2.244.0 to 2.249.0 was found to be logging in a manner that captured sensitive information (session tokens). This issue was fixed in 2.249.1. | Medium 5.5 | 26 Apr 2022 |
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.
If you've identified a potential security flaw in our infrastructure or software, please let us know within 24 hours.
Prior to reporting, please review the following information including our responsible disclosure policy, scope, reward information, and other guidelines.
Program Overview
This HackerOne bug bounty program is public and is designed for non-product security issue reporting.
#Responsible Disclosure Policy Palantir is proud to base our responsible disclosure policy on the https://disclose.io/ vulnerability disclosure framework. Security is one of our core tenets at Palantir, and we value the input of security professionals acting in good faith to help us maintain a high standard for the security and privacy of our users. This includes encouraging responsible vulnerability research and disclosure. This policy sets out our definition of good faith in the context of finding and reporting vulnerabilities, as well as what you can expect from us in return.
##When working with us according to this policy, you can expect us to:
- Extend Safe Harbor for your vulnerability research that is related to this policy.
- Work with you to understand and validate your report, including a timely initial response to the submission.
- Work to remediate discovered vulnerabilities in a timely manner.
- Recognize your contribution to improving our security if you are the first to report a unique vulnerability, and your report triggers a code or configuration change. This recognition may result in award of financial compensation (see “Rewards”) at Palantir’s discretion if allowable under regulatory, compliance, and legal requirements.
##To encourage vulnerability research and to avoid any confusion between good-faith hacking and malicious attack, we ask that you:
- Play by the rules. This includes following this policy, as well as any other relevant agreements.
- Politely report any vulnerability you’ve discovered promptly to the Palantir information security team. We reserve the right to disqualify individuals from the program for malicious, disrespectful or disruptive behavior.
- Include detailed information, including the process of replication, for the security issue in question.
- Do not engage in repeated submission of rejected, low-quality, or automated vulnerability reports.
- Do not access, modify, destroy, save, transmit, alter, transfer, use or view data belonging to anyone other than yourself. If a vulnerability provides unintended access to data, please cease testing, purge local information, and submit a report immediately.
- Avoid violating the privacy of others, disrupting our systems, destroying data, and/or harming user experience.
- Keep the details of any discovered vulnerabilities confidential, according to the Disclosure Policy. Uncoordinated public disclosure of a vulnerability may result in disqualification from this program.
- Use only the official channels designated (see “Reporting”) to discuss vulnerability information with us.
- Perform testing only on in-scope systems, and respect systems and activities which are out-of-scope.
- Do not engage in extortion, threats, or other tactics designed to elicit a response under duress. Palantir will not allow safe harbor or award rewards for vulnerability disclosure conducted under threat of full disclosure, exposure of data, or withholding of vulnerability information.
##When conducting genuine in scope vulnerability research according to this policy, we consider this research to be:
- Authorized in accordance with the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) (and/or similar state laws), and we will not initiate or support legal action against you for accidental, good faith violations of this policy when conducting genuine vulnerability research.
- Exempt from the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), and we will not bring a claim against you for circumvention of technology controls when conducting genuine vulnerability research according to this policy.
- Exempt from restrictions in our Terms & Conditions that would interfere with conducting genuine vulnerability security research, and we waive those restrictions on a limited basis for genuine vulnerability research done under this policy.
- Lawful, helpful to the overall security of the Internet, and conducted in good faith.
- You are expected, as always, to comply with all applicable laws. -If at any time you have concerns or are uncertain whether your security research is consistent with this policy, please submit a report through one of our official Reporting channels before going any further.
#Out of Scope
- Attacks designed or likely to degrade, deny, or adversely impact services or user experience (e.g., Denial of Service, Distributed Denial of Service, Brute Force, Password Spraying, Spam...).
- Attacks designed or likely to destroy, corrupt, make unreadable (or attempts therein) data or information that does not belong to you.
- Attacks designed or likely to validate stolen credentials, credential reuse, account takeover (ATO), hijacking, or other credential-based techniques.
- Intentionally accessing data or information that does not belong to you beyond the minimum viable access necessary to demonstrate the vulnerability.
- Performing physical, social engineering, or electronic attacks against Palantir personnel, offices, wireless networks, or property.
- Security issues in third-party applications, services, or dependencies that integrate with Palantir products or infrastructure that do not have a demonstrable proof of concept for the vulnerability (e.g., libraries, SAAS services).
- Security issues or vulnerabilities created or introduced by the reporter (e.g., modifying a library we rely on to include a vulnerability for the sole purpose of receiving a reward).
- Attacks performed on any systems not explicitly mentioned as authorized and in-scope.
- Reports generated from automated vulnerability assessment tools.
- Reports of missing “best practices” or other guidelines which do not indicate a security issue.
- Attacks related to email servers, email protocols, email security (e.g., SPF, DMARC, DKIM), or email spam.
- Missing cookie flags on non-sensitive cookies.
- Reports of insecure SSL/TLS ciphers (unless accompanied with working proof of concept).
- Reports of how you can learn whether a given client can authenticate to a Palantir product or service.
- Reports of mappings between code names and client names.
- Reports of simple IP or port scanning.
- Missing HTTP headers (e.g. lack of HSTS).
- Email security best practices or controls (e.g. SPF, DKIM, DMARC).
- Software or infrastructure bannering, fingerprinting, or reconnaissance with no proven vulnerability.
- Clickjacking or self-XSS reports.
- Reports of publicly resolvable or accessible DNS records for internal hosts or infrastructure.
- Reports of user-provided remote code execution in sandboxed environments (e.g., Product Features).
- Domain-based phishing, typosquatting, punycodes, bitflips, or other techniques.
- Violating any laws or breaching any agreements (or any reports of the same).
- Publicly-disclosed vulnerabilities which have already been reported to Palantir or are already known to the wider security community.
- Reports of security issues already known and tracked by the Palantir information security team.
#Rewards Palantir provides rewards to vulnerability reporters at its discretion. Our minimum reward is $250 USD.
Please note that Palantir reserves the right to adjust the bounty depending upon the severity of the vulnerability reported and quality of the report.
Palantir will only reward the first reporter of a vulnerability and only if a discovered vulnerability is deemed to be in scope and reported in compliance with this Policy.