How to Run a Safe Bug Bounty Recon Course Using Popular Indie Games

Hook: Teach safe, practical bug bounty recon using indie games — without risking your career

Beginners and instructors tell us the same pain points: they want a realistic, employer-ready recon course but fear legal exposure, messiness of test targets, and bloated tool lists. This module blueprint uses the Hytale bug bounty program as a real-world case study to teach safe recon workflows, responsible disclosure, and the exact toolchain students need to build hireable security portfolios — all in a legally cautious, reproducible course format.

Executive summary — What you’ll run in one module

In this course module students learn how to run a safe, scoped recon engagement against a modern indie game program (Hytale), produce a high-quality responsible disclosure report, and prove skills with a micro-credential. The module balances hands-on labs, legal guardrails, and career-focused deliverables. It’s designed for an 8-week block that can be adapted to bootcamps, university courses, or workplace upskilling.

Key takeaways

• Legal-first recon: how to confirm scope and safe testing before any active probing.
• Reproducible toolchain: a compact set of tools (open-source + optional pro licenses) with example commands and containerized lab setups.
• Reporting & disclosure: a tested report template that meets industry standards and Hytale’s requirements.
• Micro-credential: a rubric for grading submissions and issuing a verifiable badge or portfolio artifact.

Why Hytale (2026 relevance)

Hytale’s bug bounty program publicly rewards serious vulnerability reports (up to $25,000 for critical issues) and provides a concrete, current example of how indie studios structure scope and rewards. In late 2025 and into 2026 more game studios embraced formal bug bounties and safe‑harbor policies, making games a practical teaching domain for recon and server-client security. Using a live program like Hytale teaches students how to read scope documents, prioritize targets, and craft responsible disclosure — all skills employers value.

What the Hytale case teaches us (direct, practical lessons)

• Many game exploits (visual glitches, client-side cheats) are explicitly out of scope for bounties; security teams reward server-side, authentication, and data-impacting issues.
• Programs often require specific report formats and an age minimum or account conditions to collect a bounty — include these checks in your course intake.
• High payouts indicate the real-world impact of unauthenticated RCEs, account takeovers, and mass data exposures — these are the high-priority skills students should be able to triage.

"game exploits or cheats that do not affect server security are considered 'explicitly out of scope'"

Module blueprint: 8-week course plan

Below is a modular plan you can drop into a semester or short course. Each week includes objectives, labs, deliverables, and safety checks.

Week 0 — Pre-flight & legal orientation (1 session)

• Objectives: Read Hytale security page, scope, and disclosure policy; sign any required accounts; understand legal boundaries (CVD vs. unauthorized testing).
• Lab: Instructor-led walkthrough of the program’s scope; students identify in-scope IPs, domains, and explicit out-of-scope items.
• Deliverable: Signed student agreement to follow rules, and a one-page safety checklist per student.

Week 1 — Passive recon fundamentals

• Objectives: Teach DNS/subdomain enumeration, public footprint mapping, and passive data sources.
• Tools: passivetotal/OTX,crt.sh,SecurityTrails,CommonCrawl,Shodan (read-only).
• Lab: Passive recon on Hytale domains — collect subdomains, certificate history, and exposed cloud assets. No active probes.
• Deliverable: A passive recon summary (CSV of findings + one-page risk memo).

Week 2 — Active recon (safe & scoped)

• Objectives: Controlled scanning, rate limits, and testing only in-scope endpoints; how to obtain server responses safely.
• Tools: nmap (rate-limited), masscan for lab environments, ffuf for safe directory discovery using wordlists and throttling.
• Lab: Run a limited port scan against an explicitly-in-scope server; students document the command, timing, and rationale.
• Deliverable: Scan log, command history, and an ethical impact statement (why you chose those targets).

Week 3 — Web & API recon

• Objectives: Identify web apps, API endpoints, and auth flows in game backends.
• Tools: Burp Suite Community + HTTP(S) interception, curl, Postman, jwt.io for token analysis.
• Lab: Map API endpoints from app traffic (use recorded traffic or staged lab if heavy testing is disallowed).
• Deliverable: Endpoint inventory with authentication requirements and an attack surface map.

Week 4 — Client-side & reverse engineering basics

• Objectives: Safe static analysis of client binaries, extracting API endpoints, and protocol inspection without live tampering.
• Tools: strings, Ghidra, radare2, BinaryNinja (if available), Frida for instrumentation in lab environments.
• Lab: Static analysis of a benign client build or sample to find hard-coded endpoints and protocol hints — avoid live exploit attempts.
• Deliverable: Annotated findings showing why a hard-coded endpoint is sensitive and recommended mitigations.

Week 5 — Exploit verification & safe proof-of-concept

• Objectives: Show how to create non-destructive PoCs and how to avoid exfiltration or account compromise.
• Lab: Create a read-only PoC that demonstrates a vulnerability conceptually (e.g., return headers, reflected parameters, or auth bypass via a test account).
• Deliverable: A PoC script with safety controls (rate limits, single-user test accounts) and a justification of minimal impact.

Week 6 — Reporting & CVSS scoring

• Objectives: Draft responsible disclosure reports, assign severity (CVSS v3.x), and include remediation suggestions.
• Tools: Report templates (see below), CVSS calculator, and communication templates for triage email.
• Lab: Students draft a full Hytale-style disclosure for their hypothetical finding and peer-review another team’s report.
• Deliverable: Final draft report ready for submission through the program’s official channel.

Week 7 — Disclosure process & follow-up

• Objectives: Simulate submitting a report, handling vendor responses, and coordinating disclosure timelines.
• Lab: Instructor role-plays as vendor security team; students practice triage, responding to requests for additional info, and agreeing on disclosure timelines.
• Deliverable: A simulated email exchange record; students demonstrate negotiation skills and timeline documentation.

Week 8 — Assessment & portfolio

• Objectives: Grade technical quality, legal compliance, and communication; create a public, redacted writeup or portfolio piece.
• Deliverable: Micro-credential badge, redacted public writeup (allowed post-fix), and a one-page resume bullet linking to the report or GitHub repo.

Responsible disclosure: exact steps and legal boundaries

Responsible disclosure (also known as coordinated vulnerability disclosure) is the glue that keeps recon lawful and professional. Follow these rules in every lab and require students to sign an agreement.

Pre-test legal checklist (must pass before any active test)

• Confirm the program’s scope and age/eligibility rules; for Hytale, verify account and age limits if you plan to claim bounties.
• Obtain written authorization or confirm the bug bounty program specifically covers the activity (safe harbor).
• Use test accounts only. Never attempt to access or modify real user data or run password sprays.
• Limit impact: throttle scans, schedule probes within agreed windows, and avoid denial-of-service techniques.
• Consult legal/ethics officer if you teach in an institution — the CFAA (US) and equivalent laws can be invoked for unauthorized access.

If you find a vulnerability — step-by-step responsible disclosure

1. Stop active testing once verified; preserve evidence (logs, PCAPs, PoC) without exfiltrating sensitive data.
2. Draft a clear report using the template below and include exact repro steps, impact, environment details, and mitigation suggestions.
3. Submit via the vendor’s official channel — Hytale lists how to submit on their security page — and await confirmation.
4. Coordinate on timelines for fixes and public disclosure. Never publish a full exploit until the vendor patches and agrees to public writeups.

Toolchain & lab infrastructure (practical setup)

Keep the toolchain compact and reproducible. Use containerized environments so students can reset state and avoid contaminating their host systems.

Minimum safe stack

• Virtualization: VMware Workstation / VirtualBox or cloud VMs; network-isolated labs (private VLANs).
• Containerization: Docker images with preinstalled tools to standardize environments.
• Recon & enumeration: subfinder, amass, crt.sh, certspotter, Shodan (read-only).
• Scanning & fuzzing: nmap (with --min-rate), ffuf, Burp Suite Community.
• Binary & protocol analysis: Ghidra, strings, Wireshark, Frida (for dynamic analysis only in lab sandboxes).
• Reporting: Git (for artifacts), Markdown/PDF, and a CVSS calculator tool or web UI.

Example commands (with safety notes)

• Passive subdomain collection: amass enum -d hytale.com -passive — no active probes.
• Rate-limited port scan: nmap -Pn -p- --min-rate 50 --max-retries 2 <target> — verify scope first and throttle to avoid overloading.
• Directory discovery (throttle): ffuf -w wordlist.txt -u https://target/FUZZ -p 0.5 -t 5 — use small threads and permissions.

Sample responsible disclosure report template

Provide students with a template they must use. This enforces quality and mirrors vendor expectations.

Report fields (required)

• Title: Short, precise description (e.g., "Unauthenticated API Endpoint Allows Data Enumeration").
• Scope & Target: Exact hostnames/IPs, app versions, and environment.
• Impact: What user or system data is affected, potential for account takeover, or remote code execution.
• Reproduction steps: numbered, exact commands, and expected vs. observed behavior.
• Proof-of-concept: non-destructive PoC code snippets or screenshots (redact personal data).
• Suggested mitigation: configuration changes, rate-limiting, auth checks.
• CVSS score + justification.
• Evidence: PCAPs, logs, and hashed artifacts (stored securely).

Assessment rubric & micro-credential design

A practical micro-credential should test technical skill, legal compliance, and communication. Issue a badge when all three areas meet thresholds.

Rubric highlights

• Technical (50%): Correct recon, replicable PoC, and evidence quality.
• Legal & ethical (25%): Pre-test checklist, scoped testing, non-destructive methods.
• Communication (25%): Clarity of report, mitigation advice, and vendor communication practice.

2026 trends and advanced strategies you should teach

Teaching reconnaissance in 2026 means integrating new realities: AI-assisted triage, expanded vendor safe-harbor policies, and more organized game security ecosystems.

AI assistance (late 2025–early 2026)

LLMs and automated triage tools are now commonly used to create first-draft reports, prioritize findings, and suggest CVSS scores. Teach students to use AI for drafting while verifying every claim manually. Emphasize that AI outputs are aids — not replacements for technical validation.

Industry shifts

• More indie studios now run formal bug bounties and publish clear disclosure policies — this trend continued through 2025 into 2026.
• Coordinated Vulnerability Disclosure (CVD) is the emerging norm; ISO standards for vulnerability handling (e.g., ISO/IEC guidance) should be referenced in your curriculum.
• Attack surfaces expanded: game ecosystem vulnerabilities increasingly include cloud backends, third-party auth providers, and telemetry pipelines.

Ethics, career tips, and portfolio guidance

Converting course work into hireable evidence requires careful thought.

Redacted public writeups

• Wait until a vendor patches and approves public disclosure. Create redacted writeups that show methodology, not sensitive data.
• Include sanitized PoC code and diagrams that show impact without revealing exploit code.

Resume & interview hooks

• List the micro-credential, link to the public redacted report, and state the exact lab techniques used (e.g., “Performed passive and minimal active recon, documented findings, and drafted a CVD-compliant report”).
• Prepare a short, non-technical summary for hiring managers: the business impact and remediation value of your finding.

Instructor checklist & safety policy (must-haves)

• Student code of conduct and signed acknowledgment of legal boundaries.
• Pre-configured lab VMs and containers to prevent accidental internet scanning.
• Clear escalation path: legal counsel or designated security officer to review ambiguous cases.
• Recordkeeping: store student logs and evidence securely for audit and grading.

Common pitfalls and how to avoid them

• Pitfall: Students assume all game bugs qualify for bounties. Fix: teach how to read the scope and identify excluded classes (cheats, UI bugs).
• Pitfall: Running broad, noisy scans. Fix: require students to submit a scan plan and get instructor sign-off.
• Pitfall: Public disclosure too early. Fix: include vendor coordination exercises in the curriculum and require signed vendor approval for public writeups.

Example short case study (classroom simulation)

Student team A performs passive recon on Hytale’s public domain, discovers an undocumented API subdomain documented via certificate transparency logs, and confirms a misconfigured CORS header in a lab-copy environment. They draft a non-destructive PoC that demonstrates how a malicious web page could read limited public metadata — not user data. They submit through Hytale’s official channel, negotiate a 90-day disclosure window in the simulated vendor role-play, and publish a redacted writeup after patching. The team earns the micro-credential and a portfolio piece describing their process.

Closing: run this module, safely and effectively

Teaching bug bounty recon with an indie game like Hytale gives students real-world skills without the trappings of enterprise complexity. Follow a legal-first approach, use reproducible lab environments, and require high-quality, CVD-aligned reports. In 2026 the blend of developer-friendly bug bounty programs and AI-assisted triage creates a powerful training ground for beginner security researchers — if you teach the right boundaries and tools.

Actionable next steps (for instructors)

• Import this 8-week blueprint into your LMS and add the pre-flight legal checklist as a gating assignment.
• Create Docker-based labs with the listed tools and include snapshot restores for each student.
• Use the report template as a required deliverable and run vendor role-play sessions to practice disclosure coordination.

Ready to implement? Download the instructor pack (lab Dockerfiles, report templates, and grading rubrics) and adapt the module to your program. Teach safe recon, create real-world proof-of-skill artifacts, and help students convert bug bounty experience into career-ready credentials.

Note: Always consult your institution’s legal counsel before running live tests against public programs. This article is educational guidance and not legal advice.

Call to action

Want the full instructor pack for this module (Docker images, report templates, and slide decks)? Request the pack and a sample micro-credential rubric at skilling.pro/resources — implement a safe bug bounty recon course this term and help your students build hireable security skills.

Related Reading

• Quiet Corners: Tokyo's Best Spots for Solo Dining and Reflective Meals
• How to Test Melt Points at Home: A Simple Lab for Makers
• Deal Roundup: This Week’s Biggest Tech Price Cuts (Mac mini M4, Dreame X50 Ultra, Bluetooth Speaker, Govee Lamp)
• Budget-Friendly Music Discovery on the Road: Apps That Showcase Local Artists
• Matchday Blueprint: How to Plan the Perfect Football Day in the Emirates (Commuting, Watching, Celebrating)