BugRater
Early access: the directory is still filling out, and every rating here is a reported experience.
← The brief
Published finding · Bugcrowd

T-Mobile A finding accepted against Leaked Credentials. Bugcrowd published no award figure for it.

critical unresolved
01 · The record

Everything Bugcrowd published about this

Programme
T-Mobile In our directory, so it has reviews and a grade.
Platform handle
t-mobile
Asset
Leaked Credentials The specific asset the finding landed against, as the platform named it.
Severity
critical Bugcrowd rates P1–P5; this is that rating in HackerOne's words so the two feeds can sit in one table.
Award
Not published This does not mean nothing was paid. Both platforms let a programme accept a finding without publishing the figure, and most do.
Found by
Withheld The platform did not publish a name. We store that as withheld and never guess.
State
unresolved — accepted, not yet fixed
Accepted
5 October 2026 2 days ago. This is the date the programme accepted the finding.
First seen here
6 October 2026 When our sweep first read this entry. It says nothing about the finding, only about us.
Platform reference
52557bc2-93a3-4b6e-bf52-f3a54ea71151
View the programme on Bugcrowd ↗ Bugcrowd publishes the acceptance, not the submission. There is no public write-up for this finding anywhere, and no page for the entry itself, so this link goes to the programme. Everything Bugcrowd did publish about it is already above.
03 · The programme

What else T-Mobile has published

See T-Mobile's grade and researcher reviews →

Where this came from. One row of a public platform feed, stored as published and never edited. We hold no report title, no write-up and no reproduction steps, because the feeds do not carry them and we do not go looking for them. A withheld name stays withheld; if a finder later asks the platform to un-name them, the next sweep un-names them here. Absence of an award figure is publication policy, not evidence a programme did not pay.