generated: '2026-08-06' method: searched probe: true source: https://www.academia.edu/.well-known/security.txt contact: - mailto:security@academia.edu policy: - https://www.academia.edu/.well-known/security.txt canonical: https://academia.edu/.well-known/security.txt expires: '2026-09-05T13:16:09Z' preferred_languages: - en bug_bounty: formal_public_program: false discretionary_bounties: true statement: >- "We do not operate a formal public bug bounty program. We may award discretionary bounties for high-quality reports." Bounties are considered case by case for reports that identify a previously unknown issue, demonstrate real security impact, and are responsibly disclosed. severity_taxonomy: name: Bugcrowd Vulnerability Rating Taxonomy (P1-P5) url: https://bugcrowd.com/vulnerability-rating-taxonomy note: >- Academia asks reporters to use the Bugcrowd VRT terminology and include a P1-P5 severity rating. This is a reference to the taxonomy only - there is no Bugcrowd-hosted program. prioritized_classes: - authentication bypass or account takeover - data exposure or access control issues - cross-site scripting (XSS) with working proof of concept - privilege escalation lower_priority_classes: - best-practice recommendations without exploitability - automated scan results without validation - hypothetical or purely theoretical scenarios report_expectations: - confirmed vulnerability rather than a theoretical concern - clear, reproducible steps - demonstrated concrete impact - minimal reproduction, proof-of-concept code, or a short screen recording evidence: - source: well-known/academia-security.txt kind: security.txt url: https://www.academia.edu/.well-known/security.txt http_status: 200 content_type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 fetched: '2026-08-06' notes: >- The whole disclosure policy is published inline in the security.txt as comment blocks rather than at a separate Policy: URL, so the RFC 9116 file itself is the policy document. No Policy:, Encryption:, Acknowledgments: or Hiring: fields are present.