The numbers from Bugcrowd’s 2026 “Inside the Mind of a Hacker” report are striking: 82% of security researchers now use generative AI in their workflows, up from 64% just a year earlier. This isn’t a marginal adoption trend — it’s a fundamental transformation in how vulnerability research happens. YesWeHack’s parallel 2026 report confirms the pattern, documenting how augmented intelligence is helping defenders find vulnerabilities faster, write clearer reports, and remediate issues more effectively. But as with most powerful technologies, AI in bug bounty is a double-edged sword, simultaneously making good researchers dramatically better while enabling a flood of low-quality submissions that threaten the ecosystem itself.

The positive side of AI-assisted security research is genuinely transformative. Researchers are using LLMs for smarter reconnaissance, automating tedious aspects of vulnerability discovery, and generating more comprehensive test cases than manual approaches would allow. Pattern recognition across massive codebases — a task that would take human researchers weeks or months — can now happen in hours with AI assistance. Fuzzing engines enhanced with machine learning are discovering edge cases that traditional tools miss. The result is measurable: a 210% increase in valid AI-related vulnerability reports in 2025 compared to 2024, according to aggregated platform data.

How AI Enhances Legitimate Research

Understanding how skilled researchers actually use AI reveals why adoption has been so rapid. AI isn’t replacing human expertise — it’s amplifying it. A researcher analyzing a complex web application can use LLMs to quickly understand unfamiliar frameworks, generate test payloads for specific vulnerability classes, and draft detailed reports that communicate findings clearly to development teams. Time that previously went to boilerplate work now goes to creative problem-solving and deeper analysis.

The reconnaissance phase of vulnerability research has been particularly transformed. AI tools can analyze public data sources, identify potential attack surfaces, and suggest areas worth deeper investigation. They can read API documentation and automatically generate test cases for authentication flows. They can examine previous vulnerability reports and identify patterns that might apply to new targets. These aren’t trivial improvements — they represent the difference between finding surface-level issues and discovering deep architectural vulnerabilities that human-only analysis might miss.

Report writing quality has improved significantly as well. Researchers who may be technically brilliant but struggle with clear written communication can now produce reports that development teams actually understand and act on. AI assistance helps structure vulnerability descriptions, explain exploitation steps clearly, and articulate business impact in terms that resonate with non-technical stakeholders. This isn’t about AI writing reports autonomously — it’s about augmenting human communication skills so technical findings lead to actual security improvements.

The Dark Side: AI Slop and Platform Burden

But the same capabilities that make good researchers more effective also enable mass production of worthless submissions. The cURL bug bounty shutdown, discussed extensively in recent industry conversations, was a direct casualty of AI-generated junk reports. When creating a plausible-sounding vulnerability report requires minimal effort and zero actual security knowledge, economic incentives produce exactly what we’ve seen: a flood of submissions that consume maintainer time without providing value.

The scale of the problem extends beyond individual programs. Platform-wide metrics show the challenge clearly. While valid AI-assisted reports increased 210%, total submission volume increased even faster, meaning triage burden has grown substantially. Programs that once had manageable signal-to-noise ratios are now drowning in automated spam. Maintainers who should be fixing real vulnerabilities are instead reading AI-generated hallucinations about security flaws that don’t exist.

82% of ethical hackers now use generative AI in their workflows, up from 64% in 2025 — a transformation in how vulnerability research happens.

Web3 and Smart Contracts: AI’s Proving Ground

The Web3 and smart contract security space offers a particularly vivid illustration of AI’s dual nature in bug bounty. The FailSafe 2025 report documented $263 million in smart contract bug damages during the first half of 2025 alone, with total losses across 192 incidents reaching $2.6 billion. Access control flaws caused $953.2 million in losses, while 116 inconsistent state update vulnerabilities were confirmed across 352 projects. These are complex, high-value targets where skilled researchers with AI assistance can make significant impact.

Smart contract auditing is an ideal use case for AI augmentation. The code is public, the potential vulnerabilities follow known patterns, and the financial stakes are clear. Researchers using AI tools for static analysis, symbolic execution, and formal verification are finding real vulnerabilities that lead to substantial bounty payouts. But the same space also attracts low-effort submissions — generic reports about reentrancy vulnerabilities in contracts that don’t have reentrancy risks, or hallucinated access control issues based on misunderstanding code logic.

The Industry Response: Adapting to the New Reality

Bug bounty platforms and programs aren’t standing still as this transformation unfolds. The industry response has centered on three key areas: reputation-weighted scoring systems, AI-assisted triage on the platform side, and mandatory proof-of-concept requirements. Reputation systems ensure that researchers with track records of quality submissions get prioritized, while serial low-quality submitters get filtered out. AI-assisted triage helps platforms identify likely false positives before they consume program manager time. PoC requirements force submitters to demonstrate actual exploitation, not just theoretical concerns.

These adaptations are necessary but not sufficient. Programs need better tools to distinguish between AI-augmented legitimate research and AI-generated noise. Platforms need transparent policies about acceptable AI use — not banning it entirely (which would be both impossible and counterproductive) but setting clear standards for originality, technical depth, and demonstrated impact. Researchers need guidance on how to use AI ethically while maintaining the quality standards that make bug bounties valuable.

The future is clear: AI won’t replace human hackers, but it will make good ones dramatically better. Researchers who master AI as an augmentation tool will find more vulnerabilities, write clearer reports, and earn higher payouts than those who resist the technology. But platforms must simultaneously evolve their quality systems to filter out AI-generated spam. This isn’t a temporary challenge to weather — it’s the new permanent reality of bug bounty operations. Success will require combining AI capabilities with robust human verification, vetted researcher communities, and platform tools designed for the post-LLM world. The researchers and platforms that adapt quickly will thrive; those that don’t will follow cURL into irrelevance.

When the U.S. Department of Defense launched “Hack the Pentagon” in 2016, it represented a radical shift in how governments approach cybersecurity. For the first time, a federal agency was inviting security researchers to actively probe its systems, offering bounties for vulnerabilities discovered. The program, orchestrated by the Defense Digital Service, wasn’t just a PR stunt — it was a genuine acknowledgment that external researchers could find security flaws that internal teams missed. Nearly a decade later, that experiment has evolved into a global movement, with governments from Singapore to Europe embracing bug bounties as a core component of national cybersecurity strategy.

The success of those early DoD programs set the template for government bug bounties worldwide. Today, the Department of Defense maintains ongoing contracts with major platforms including HackerOne, Synack, and Bugcrowd, covering military systems, defense contractors, and sensitive government assets. What started as a pilot program has become standard operating procedure — a recognition that the traditional approach of keeping security research at arm’s length was leaving critical systems vulnerable.

Singapore’s Leadership in Government Bug Bounties

While the United States may have pioneered government bug bounties, Singapore has emerged as a global leader in systematic implementation. The Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) has run three major closed-group bug bounty programs in 2018, 2019, and 2022, each involving approximately 300 carefully vetted white-hat hackers. These weren’t symbolic exercises — the programs offered rewards up to $15,000 for critical vulnerabilities, and researchers delivered results.

Singapore GovTech, the agency responsible for the city-state’s digital government infrastructure, took the model even further. Their Vulnerability Rewards Programme, hosted on HackerOne, offers bounties up to $150,000 for critical vulnerabilities in government systems. That’s not a typo — a six-figure payout for a vulnerability that could compromise citizen data or critical government services. The message is clear: Singapore views security research as a strategic investment, not an expense to minimize.

The Singapore approach offers important lessons for other governments. First, they run closed programs with invited researchers only, maintaining operational security while accessing external expertise. Second, they offer competitive bounties that attract serious talent. Third, they treat these programs as ongoing operations, not one-off experiments. The result is a government that’s continuously stress-testing its security posture with help from the global researcher community.

Europe and the Enterprise Model

The European Commission took a different but equally innovative approach with the EU-FOSSA (Free and Open Source Software Audit) program. Rather than focusing solely on government-owned systems, EU-FOSSA ran bug bounties on critical open-source software that European institutions depend on. This recognized a fundamental truth: modern government operations rely heavily on open-source infrastructure, and securing that foundation benefits everyone.

The broader enterprise adoption of bug bounties reinforces the government case. Intel’s 2024 security disclosure report revealed that nearly 50% of all vulnerabilities the company disclosed were discovered through their bug bounty program. When a major technology manufacturer finds half its vulnerabilities through external researchers, it validates the model for any organization with complex digital infrastructure — including governments.

Singapore GovTech’s Vulnerability Rewards Programme offers bounties up to $150,000 for critical government system vulnerabilities — a six-figure commitment to proactive security.

Why Governments Choose Private Programs

There’s a clear pattern in government bug bounty adoption: nearly all programs are private or closed, requiring researcher vetting and often security clearances. This isn’t about excluding talent — it’s about managing national security concerns that don’t exist in commercial programs. Government systems handle classified information, citizen data, and critical infrastructure. A vulnerability disclosure mishandled could have serious consequences beyond financial loss.

Private programs allow governments to maintain controlled scope, ensuring researchers focus on approved systems while avoiding sensitive areas. They enable NDA requirements that prevent premature disclosure of security flaws. They support researcher vetting, ensuring participants have verified identities and track records. For governments, these features aren’t optional nice-to-haves — they’re fundamental requirements for any external security research program.

The Armenia Opportunity

Armenia has quietly emerged as one of the most dynamic technology hubs in the region, with a thriving IT sector, world-class engineering talent, and a government increasingly focused on digital transformation. As the country builds out its e-governance platforms, digital identity systems, and public-facing services, the attack surface grows — and with it, the need for structured security research programs. Armenia’s tech-savvy workforce and growing cybersecurity community make it uniquely positioned to adopt government bug bounty programs.

A government-backed bug bounty program in Armenia would serve multiple purposes. It would strengthen national cyber resilience at a fraction of the cost of traditional security audits. It would signal to the international community that Armenia takes digital security seriously — a critical factor for attracting foreign investment and technology partnerships. And it would tap into the country’s deep pool of technical talent, giving Armenian security researchers a structured way to contribute to national defense. Countries like Singapore proved that even smaller nations can run world-class bug bounty programs — Armenia has every reason to follow that path.

The evolution from “Hack the Pentagon” to today’s global government bug bounty ecosystem demonstrates that the model works. Governments that once viewed security researchers with suspicion now actively recruit their help. Programs that started as experiments have become permanent fixtures. As digital government initiatives expand worldwide, bug bounties are evolving from innovative experiments to standard components of national cybersecurity strategy. The question for governments isn’t whether to implement bug bounty programs, but how quickly they can stand them up and what partnerships will help them do so effectively.

In January 2026, one of the most widely-deployed software projects in the world made a decision that sent shockwaves through the security community: cURL, the ubiquitous data transfer library installed on over 20 billion devices, shut down its bug bounty program on HackerOne. The reason wasn’t a lack of vulnerabilities or budget constraints — it was something far more troubling. The program had been overwhelmed by a tidal wave of AI-generated junk submissions, rendering it effectively useless.

This wasn’t a quiet sunset. Daniel Stenberg, the creator of cURL and its longtime maintainer, publicly documented the chaos in the program’s final days. In a 16-hour period, the project received 20 vulnerability submissions. Not a single one was legitimate. Every report was AI-generated noise — convincing-sounding technical jargon wrapped around non-existent security flaws. The confirmed-vulnerability rate, which had historically hovered above 15%, had plummeted below 5% starting in 2025. The signal-to-noise ratio had become untenable.

The Rise and Fall of cURL’s Bug Bounty

Over its lifetime, cURL’s bug bounty program was a genuine success story. The project identified and fixed approximately 87 confirmed vulnerabilities through the program, paying out over $100,000 in rewards to researchers who helped secure a critical piece of internet infrastructure. For years, it represented exactly what bug bounties should be: a productive collaboration between maintainers and the security community, making software safer for everyone.

But the arrival of large language models changed the equation dramatically. By late 2024 and into 2025, the program began experiencing a new phenomenon: the “AI slop” crisis. LLMs had become sophisticated enough to generate technical security reports that looked legitimate on the surface — complete with CVE-style identifiers, technical terminology, and formatted vulnerability descriptions. The problem was that these reports described vulnerabilities that didn’t actually exist.

Stenberg didn’t stand by quietly. He publicly threatened to ban anyone submitting AI-generated reports and implemented stricter submission guidelines. It didn’t help. The flood continued, consuming maintainer time and energy that should have been spent on legitimate security work. On February 1, 2026, cURL officially moved to GitHub-only vulnerability reporting with no monetary incentive attached. The bug bounty era for cURL was over.

What This Means for the Industry

The cURL shutdown isn’t an isolated incident — it’s a warning signal for the entire bug bounty ecosystem. Open-door programs that accept submissions from anyone without vetting are increasingly vulnerable to abuse at scale. When the cost of generating a fake vulnerability report approaches zero and the potential reward remains positive, basic economics predict exactly what happened to cURL.

The industry’s response needs to be multi-faceted. Platforms require better automated triage systems that can distinguish between AI-generated noise and legitimate research. Researcher vetting and reputation systems need to become standard features, not optional add-ons. Programs need tools to identify patterns of abuse and block bad actors before they consume maintainer bandwidth.

The confirmed-vulnerability rate plummeted from 15%+ to below 5% starting in 2025, making the program unsustainable for volunteer maintainers.

This is where vetted, private bug bounty programs demonstrate their value. Platforms that implement KYC verification, maintain researcher reputation scores, and prioritize quality over quantity are naturally resistant to the AI slop problem. When researchers have verified identities and track records, the economics of spam change dramatically. Programs can focus on signal instead of drowning in noise.

The Path Forward: Evolution, Not Extinction

The lesson from cURL’s shutdown isn’t that bug bounties are dead — it’s that the fully-open, no-verification model is dying. The future belongs to programs that balance accessibility with accountability. Researchers should still be able to earn rewards for legitimate security work, but platforms need mechanisms to ensure that’s what they’re actually receiving.

Private programs with vetted researcher pools, reputation-weighted submission systems, and human-assisted triage represent the natural evolution of the bug bounty model. These aren’t closed gardens that exclude new talent — they’re quality filters that protect maintainers’ time while still rewarding skilled researchers. As AI capabilities continue to advance, this evolution from open-door to vetted-access will only accelerate.

The cURL shutdown is a milestone moment for the industry, but it doesn’t have to be a tragedy. If platforms and programs learn the right lessons — invest in better tooling, implement stronger vetting, and design systems that resist AI-generated noise — bug bounties can continue fulfilling their original promise: making software more secure through collaboration between builders and breakers. The question is whether the industry will adapt quickly enough, or whether we’ll see more high-profile programs follow cURL’s example and shut their doors entirely.

Artificial intelligence is transforming vulnerability discovery at both ends — accelerating what researchers can find, while flooding programs with noise. Here’s what the AI-driven bug bounty landscape actually looks like in 2026.

AI-Powered Vulnerability Discovery Is Real

Let’s start with the good news. AI is genuinely accelerating how security researchers find vulnerabilities. Large Language Models can now analyze code, identify patterns, and suggest attack vectors at a speed no human can match. Researchers using AI-assisted tools are finding more bugs, faster, across larger codebases.

What used to take days of manual code review can now be narrowed to hours. AI excels at:

• Pattern recognition — identifying known vulnerability patterns (SQL injection, XSS, IDOR) across large codebases
• Attack surface mapping — automatically cataloging API endpoints, input vectors, and authentication flows
• Variant analysis — once a bug class is found, AI can search for similar patterns across the entire application
• Fuzzing at scale — generating intelligent test cases that target likely vulnerability points

Google’s new AI Vulnerability Reward Program — paying up to $30,000 per finding — explicitly targets AI-specific vulnerabilities like prompt injection, training data extraction, and model manipulation. This is a new attack surface that didn’t exist five years ago, and it’s growing fast.

The Dark Side: AI Slop Reports

Now the bad news. The same AI tools that help researchers also enable a flood of low-quality, automated reports that waste everyone’s time. In January 2026, the curl project — one of the most widely used open-source tools on the planet — shut down its bug bounty program entirely because of overwhelming AI-generated noise.

The curl maintainer described receiving reports that were clearly machine-generated, often describing vulnerabilities that didn’t exist or misunderstanding fundamental aspects of the codebase. Each bogus report still required human time to evaluate and dismiss.

This is the central tension of AI in bug bounty: AI lowers the barrier to entry, but not all entry is equal. A flood of mediocre reports can actually make security worse by consuming triage bandwidth that should be spent on real findings.

Managed Platforms Are the Answer

The curl incident illustrates why managed bug bounty platforms exist. When an open-source project runs its own program, it has no triage buffer — every report lands directly on the maintainer’s desk. Managed platforms solve this by providing:

• Professional triage teams that filter AI noise before it reaches your security engineers
• Researcher vetting that ensures participants have demonstrated skill, not just API access
• Reputation scoring that rewards quality over volume — researchers who submit noise see their scores drop
• Duplicate detection that catches the same AI-generated finding submitted by multiple users

At BugBounty AM, our triage process is designed to handle exactly this reality. We validate every submission before it reaches your team — eliminating false positives, duplicates, and low-quality reports regardless of whether they were generated by a human or a machine.

AI as Offensive Weapon: Machine-Scale Attacks

The threat landscape is shifting too. According to Malwarebytes’ 2026 State of Malware report, cybercrime is entering a “post-human” phase where AI drives machine-scale attacks. Attackers are using the same AI capabilities — vulnerability discovery, exploit generation, social engineering — but without ethical constraints.

This creates an urgent need for defenders to match pace. Bug bounty programs that leverage skilled human researchers augmented by AI tools represent one of the most effective ways to stay ahead of automated threats. The key word is augmented — AI assists the researcher, but human creativity, intuition, and contextual understanding remain irreplaceable for finding the bugs that matter most.

New Attack Surfaces: AI Systems Themselves

Perhaps the most significant development is that AI systems are now attack targets in their own right. Prompt injection, training data poisoning, model extraction, and adversarial inputs represent entirely new vulnerability classes that traditional scanners cannot detect.

Organizations deploying AI — from chatbots to autonomous agents — need security testing specifically designed for these systems. This is where the next generation of bug bounty programs is heading: specialized programs targeting AI/ML infrastructure with researchers who understand both security and machine learning.

What This Means for 2026 and Beyond

• AI won’t replace human bug hunters — but researchers who use AI will outperform those who don’t
• Triage quality becomes the differentiator — programs without professional triage will drown in noise
• AI-specific bounties will grow — as more organizations deploy AI, the attack surface expands
• Reputation and vetting matter more than ever — the era of anonymous, unvetted submissions is ending

The future of bug bounty is human expertise amplified by AI, filtered through professional triage, and governed by clear rules of engagement. That’s exactly what BugBounty AM delivers.

Interested in launching a bug bounty program that’s built for the AI era? Contact us to learn how BugBounty AM can help your organization stay ahead of both human and machine-driven threats.

The bug bounty and vulnerability disclosure landscape is evolving faster than ever. Here’s what 2026 looks like — and what it means for organizations and researchers.

Record-Breaking Vulnerability Volume

The Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams (FIRST) recently forecast that over 50,000 CVEs will be disclosed in 2026 — a record-breaking number that’s expected to climb even further, with projections reaching nearly 193,000 by 2028. This isn’t just about more software existing — it reflects better discovery tooling, more organizations operating as CVE Numbering Authorities, and sustained scrutiny of long-neglected open-source codebases.

For security teams, the signal-to-noise ratio is becoming the real challenge. More CVEs doesn’t mean more risk — it means better triage, prioritization, and context are no longer optional. Bug bounty platforms play a critical role here by delivering validated, severity-rated findings rather than raw scanner output.

The EU Cyber Resilience Act Changes Everything

Starting September 11, 2026, the EU Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) kicks in with mandatory vulnerability reporting and incident notification requirements for any product with digital elements sold in the European market. This is a seismic shift:

• Manufacturers must report actively exploited vulnerabilities to ENISA within 24 hours
• Coordinated vulnerability disclosure programs become a compliance requirement, not a nice-to-have
• Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) and vulnerability monitoring are now baseline expectations

Organizations that already operate bug bounty or VDP programs are significantly ahead of the curve. Those that don’t will scramble to build disclosure infrastructure under regulatory pressure — and that’s never a good position to be in.

The curl Controversy — Quality Over Quantity

In January 2026, the curl project shut down its bug bounty program entirely — not because of funding, but because of an overwhelming flood of low-quality, AI-generated vulnerability reports. The project’s maintainer described the reports as “useless” and a drain on limited triage resources.

This is a wake-up call for the industry. Bug bounty programs only work when the signal quality is high. Managed platforms with professional triage teams — like BugBounty AM — exist precisely to solve this problem. We filter the noise so your security team only sees validated, actionable findings.

Payouts Are Climbing — Because Stakes Are Higher

Google launched a dedicated AI Vulnerability Reward Program in late 2025, offering up to $30,000 per finding for flaws in AI products like Search and Drive. Their live hacking event paid out $458,000 in a single session. Meanwhile, smart contract bug bounties regularly exceed $1 million for critical findings.

The trend is clear: organizations are willing to pay more because the cost of missing a vulnerability is exponentially higher. A single critical bug in production can cost millions in breach response, regulatory fines, and reputation damage. Paying researchers $10,000–$50,000 to find it first is a bargain.

Vulnerability Disclosure Is Now a Maturity Signal

Regulators, enterprise buyers, and investors increasingly view the presence of a Vulnerability Disclosure Policy as a signal of cybersecurity maturity. Frameworks like NIST CSF 2.0, ISO 27001, and the EU CRA explicitly reference coordinated disclosure. Not having a VDP in 2026 is like not having a privacy policy in 2018 — it raises questions about your security posture.

What This Means for Organizations

Whether you’re a startup, a government agency, or a multinational enterprise, the message is the same:

• If you don’t have a VDP, build one now. Regulatory requirements are arriving and researcher trust depends on it.
• If you’re running a bug bounty program, invest in triage quality. The curl lesson applies to everyone — volume without validation wastes everyone’s time.
• If you’re in the GCC or EMEA, get ahead of the curve. Regional regulators are watching the EU CRA closely. Similar requirements will follow.

At BugBounty AM, we help organizations launch and manage bug bounty programs with professional triage, clear rules of engagement, and a vetted researcher community. Whether you’re starting your first VDP or scaling an existing program, we’re built for this moment.

Ready to get started? Visit our platform or get in touch to discuss a managed program tailored to your organization.

Incubated by DTS Solution | Empowering Ethical Hackers & Securing Digital Armenia

Today marks a significant milestone for the Armenian cybersecurity ecosystem with the official launch of BugBounty.am — the country’s newest bug bounty and vulnerability disclosure platform, designed to connect ethical hackers with organizations seeking to strengthen their digital defenses.

Built with support and incubation from DTS Solution, a leading cybersecurity and digital transformation advisory firm, BugBounty.am aims to revolutionize Armenia’s approach to proactive security testing and community-driven vulnerability discovery.

Why BugBounty.am Matters

In an era where cyber threats evolve faster than ever before, organizations need to go beyond traditional security assessments. BugBounty.am empowers both private and public sector entities to:

• Leverage the collective skills of ethical hackers — Tapping into a global and local community of security researchers to find hidden vulnerabilities.
• Reward responsible disclosure — Encouraging security researchers with structured incentives while ensuring safe and legal reporting.
• Strengthen Armenia’s cyber resilience — Supporting national efforts to protect digital infrastructure — an increasingly critical priority as digital services expand.

By combining crowdsourced security testing with structured governance, BugBounty.am helps organizations uncover risks before malicious actors do.

What Makes It Unique

BugBounty.am differentiates itself through several key features:

• Localized focus with global standards — Tailored to Armenian businesses, government services, and digital platforms, but built on industry best practices.
• Incubation by DTS Solution — Backed by deep cybersecurity expertise, strategic know-how, and access to professional tools and methodologies.
• Clear reporting guidelines and safe harbor — Ensuring security researchers can report issues confidently and legally.
• Rewards & recognition structure — Offering financial incentives or acknowledgments based on severity, impact, and quality of findings.

A New Era for Ethical Hacking in Armenia

Across the region, bug bounty programs have become a cornerstone of modern cybersecurity. They promote:

• Continuous testing beyond scheduled pentests
• Engagement with diverse hacker skillsets
• Improved trust and transparency for digital products and services

Similar initiatives worldwide showcase the value of incentivized hacking communities in strengthening security posture.

With BugBounty.am, Armenia now joins this global movement — fostering collaboration between security researchers and organizations while contributing to professional growth opportunities for local cyber talent.

What’s Next

BugBounty.am is now open for:

• Organizations looking to launch or manage bug bounty programs.
• Security researchers eager to hunt vulnerabilities and get rewarded.
• Developers and CISOs seeking continuous assurance and risk reduction.

Stay tuned for upcoming events, competitions, and community meetups tied to BugBounty.am — including workshops and hackathons aimed at strengthening Armenia’s cybersecurity readiness.

Ready to join the hunt?
Whether you’re an ethical hacker searching for bugs or an organization ready to elevate your security posture, BugBounty.am is your gateway to more secure digital horizons.