LoopGhost

@MitchellAmador @theonejvo I also want to apologize for my part in the situation. Even if I didn’t always feel fairly treated, I recognize that I did not fully comply with the rules either. If you’re willing to request a re-evaluation of my case, I would genuinely appreciate it.

@MitchellAmador @theonejvo I’m happy to provide examples of this work if helpful, so you or the team can evaluate my current level and mindset. I understand the importance of the rules and the role they play in keeping the ecosystem sustainable. I’m committed to fully adhering to them going forward.

Yup. Bug bounty is dead AF in this sense. I know multiple people at this point who have reported national security level issues (not exaggerating) via programs only to have some mouth breathing, reddit mod worthy triage team member flag it as out of scope. In multiple of these cases, the original finder reported it directly to said effected party (Govt/defence) and very quickly it was treated with the significance it deserved. They will keep doing this to keep churn down as their business model isn't ready to scale for AI bug finding. But once the third-world hunters (who are being exploited for low payouts) dry up, it's GG.

@MitchellAmador @theonejvo Simple steps like a small submission fee, for example $5, and a fair review of past bans could significantly improve the platform and rebuild trust across the community.

@MitchellAmador @theonejvo The goal should be to facilitate responsible disclosure, not discourage it. Fixing edge cases is not easy, but it is necessary.

@MitchellAmador @theonejvo Real whitehats are getting non-sense bans again and again. Some of them will directly disclose to the projects, but some others may turn blackhats. You should take care of the projects listed on Immunefi. Your policies are putting them at a critical risk of being exploited.

@MitchellAmador @theonejvo The web3 bug bounty space is full of unfairness, and your platform is the main reason for it. I’ve found huge criticals on blockchain/dlt BBPs outside Immunefi since you banned me. Still you don’t want me in your platform. The projects on Immunefi are at risk of exploitation.

@LoopGhost007 @0xMSF14 @immunefi This 👆🏽 i also know of researcher banned because their first few submissions were closed as not valid. And this is a researcher established in Web2 research with many CVEs to their name

@0xMSF14 @immunefi I totally agree, they are massively banning real researchers just because none of their first 3 reports were marked as valid (in some cases marked as invalid even though they were valid). I’m banned, and in the last 3 months I’ve secured HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS in Blockchain BBPs

I don't know what happened to @immunefi but they are partly responsible for the surge in hacks in 2026. People may want to submit a critical vulnerabilities and you are asking them to submit KYC information first ? to limit "spam". What happens if they don't want to ?

@d0rsky @infsec_io Hey @d0rsky , please check DMs! Thanks man!

If your goal was to make $1M from bug bounties in 2026 you might want to move faster. @infsec_io is already halfway there… and that’s only counting submissions on HackenProof 👀 The pace this year is different.

@hyperbridge, you said I should hack you, yh? x.com/hyperbridge/st… Well, unfortunately, I did not hack you, but I have a list of bugs, and this was the 3rd on my list. @seunlanlege It is better that you pause this bridge indefinitely.

@LuxLode They wanted to get hacked, check out this recent tweet. They got what they were looking for!

> Only 1 audit. > No public Bug Bounty Program. > Overly confident marketing. Gets hacked. Feel sorry for the users and the team, but this should be once again a sign to take security more seriously.

@hyperbridge @adeolRxxxx @hyperbridge what do you have to say now? Your tweets aren’t serious. Take your users’ funds seriously.

You bluff too much for a bridge that has undergone only one audit, which is currently live onchain. I hope you learn from products who has 10 and still got hacked.