This content originally appeared on DEV Community and was authored by Dev Programming

In this post, I share my 100-Hour Rule - how I structure every minute of hunting into focused phases, avoid the sunk cost trap, and boost my chances of finding high-value vulnerabilities while staying ready for the next big target.

Heloo there, fellow hackers, security enthusiasts, and aspiring bounty hunters! If you’ve ever dived into the world of bug bounties, you know it’s a thrilling mix of detective work, technical wizardry, and sheer persistence. But after three solid years grinding in this space - submitting reports, dealing with triages, and celebrating those occasional payouts - I’ve honed a simple yet powerful productivity hack that keeps me good and maintained. I call it the 100-Hour Rule, and it’s become my go-to strategy for maximizing impact while dodging the burnout that’s all too common in this game.

In this article, I’ll break it down step by step: why I created it, how I apply it in practice, and the real, tangible ways it’s transformed my approach. Think of this as a factual deep dive, grounded in real-world bug bounty dynamics, with tips drawn from established best practices in the community. No fluff - just actionable insights to help you level up your hunts. Let’s get into it.

Why I Created the 100-Hour Rule: A Lesson in Time and Sanity

Bug bounty hunting isn’t just about finding vulnerabilities; it’s a marathon of reconnaissance, testing, and reporting in an ecosystem that’s constantly evolving. Platforms like HackerOne, Bugcrowd, and plethora of other hunting platforms that host thousands of programs from companies big and small, each with their own scopes, rules, and payout structures. But here’s the harsh reality: not every program is a goldmine, and without boundaries, you can easily sink endless hours into fruitless pursuits.

I came to know about these kinda challenges after watching content about challenges like the “75 Hard” program - a rigorous 75-day regimen designed to build mental toughness through daily habits like workouts, reading, and water intake and I saw people are customizing by their own rules and choices. It got me thinking: why not apply a similar disciplined structure to bug bounties? I was tired of my rookie mistakes, like spending weeks on bloated enterprise programs with massive scopes (think of numbers of subdomains and endpoints), only to emerge empty-handed, frustrated, and mentally drained.

Enter the 100-Hour Rule: a self-imposed cap where I dedicate no more than 100 hours to any single bug bounty program. If, by the end of that time, I haven’t uncovered a meaningful vulnerability - something reportable like small to big, or even a subtle business logic error - I cut my losses and move on. No extensions, no excuses. If I found any small vulnerabilities and then I stack it down to the list where if I didn’t find any big vulnerabilities in singular or conjuction way then I moved onto testing these small bugs, retriggering to confirm whether it exist or not and also checked out previously submitted reports if public to gain more information to get on.

This isn’t arbitrary; it’s rooted in productivity principles from fields like software development and project management. For instance, the Pareto Principle (80/20 rule) often applies here: 80% of your results come from 20% of your efforts. By capping at 100 hours, I’m forcing myself to focus on high-yield activities early on, respecting the fact that bug bounties are inherently competitive and time-sensitive. Programs evolve - vulnerabilities get patched, scopes change - and lingering too long increases the risk of duplicates or diminished returns.

Factual note: According to HackerOne’s annual reports, the average time from vulnerability discovery to report submission can vary, but top hunters emphasize efficiency. In 2023, the platform paid out over $100 million in bounties, but only to those who targeted smartly, not exhaustively.

How I Make the Most of Those 100 Hours

With a strict deadline looming, every minute counts. The 100-Hour Rule turns vague “hunting” into a structured operation, much like agile sprints in software engineering, as the fact I practiced some kind continuous work because I’ve attended tens of hackathons. I divide my time into phases: reconnaissance (20–30 hours), deep diving (50–60 hours), and reporting/polishing (remaining time). My goal is to squeeze the maximum output toward the specific program I’ve targeted, making sure every minute is put to use.

I once saw a vlog by Stok and NahamSec where they sat for 10–15 hours straight in one place, just trying to find vulnerabilities. But personally, I really admire tomnomnom - he’s the kind of person who goes all-in to hunt those high-payout vulnerabilities.

I’ve built myself a stack of tasks to follow the 100-Hour Rule efficiently, and the moment I start, I instantly turn on my Pomodoro timer to track every second. That urgency and discipline create a kind of pressure that actually sharpens focus - because if you don’t stay locked in, you might miss at least one vulnerability you could’ve found.

Here’s how I optimize each step, with detailed tactics backed by community-proven methods.

1. Skip the Low-Hanging Fruit Frenzy and Hunt the Overlooked

In bug bounties, “low-hanging fruit” refers to obvious, easily detectable issues like open redirects, missing rate limits, or basic XSS in user inputs. These are the quick and easy wins that attract hordes of hunters, especially in popular programs from tech companies. But chasing them is a trap: the competition is fierce, payouts are often minimal (e.g., $500-$1,000 for low-severity finds), and duplicates are rampant - HackerOne data shows that up to 40% of submissions get rejected as duplicates.

Most of the time you would you realize that working on duplicates could be beneficial sometime because anything can lead it to newer vulnerabilities.

Instead, I prioritize under-the-radar vulnerabilities that require creativity and persistence. Here’s a detailed playbook:

Misconfigurations in Infrastructure: These are goldmines because they’re often overlooked in automated scans. For example, I check for exposed AWS S3 buckets using tools like S3Scanner or by manually inspecting bucket policies via the AWS CLI (if in scope). A real-world case: In 2022, a hunter earned $10,000 from Uber for an S3 misconfig leaking user data. I allocate 10–15 hours here, enumerating assets with tools like Amass for subdomain discovery.
Leaked Secrets via Code Repos: Using Gitleaks or TruffleHog, I scan public GitHub repos linked to the target (via domain searches). This has uncovered API keys, passwords, and tokens leading to critical access. Pro tip: Combine this with GitRob for broader repo analysis. One of my P1 (Priority 1, critical severity) finds was a leaked JWT secret allowing account takeovers - payout? Over $5,000. From leaks, you could find any employees private email which they might have used it as login into the internal dashboard or something for this you can use dorking or other things.
Subtle Logic Flaws: These aren’t caught by scanners; they require understanding the app’s business logic. For instance, in e-commerce programs, I test for race conditions in payment flows (e.g., using Burp Suite’s Turbo Intruder to send parallel requests). Or in social platforms, IDOR where user IDs can be manipulated to access private data. I dedicate time to mapping the app with tools like Insomnia or my favorite tool cURL for API endpoints.
Undocumented Endpoints: Many apps have hidden APIs not listed in docs. I use tools like Feroxbuster for directory brute-forcing or analyze JavaScript files with LinkFinder to extract endpoints. Funny enough, these “unsexy” spots have yielded my biggest bounties because they’re less trafficked.

By focusing here, my 100 hours yield unique finds. Community wisdom from hackers like @zseano or @NahamSec echoes this: depth over breadth wins in mature programs.

2. Steer Clear of the Crowds for Better Odds

Popular programs (e.g., those with 1,000+ hunters on Bugcrowd) are like crowded fishing spots - everyone’s casting lines, and the big catches are rare. Stats from Intigriti show that in high-competition programs, the duplicate rate can exceed 50%.

My strategy: Target niche or underhyped programs. I scout via platforms’ directories, filtering for “new” or “private invite” ones, or those in sectors like fintech or healthcare where scopes are focused. Tools like Firebounty or you can directly find the private program using dorking that help aggregate programs by payout potential and activity levels.

In practice, if a program’s hall of fame lists hundreds of reports in the last month, I skip it. Instead, I aim for ones with thinner competition, it’s not that I don’t like competition, it just I don’t wanna to go to the overcrowded places - my hit rate jumps from 10% to 30–40%. This aligns with economic principles: lower supply of hunters means higher value per effort.

3. Know When to Walk Away Gracefully

Not every program aligns with your skills - and that’s completely fine. If the scope excludes mobile apps and you’re came out as an Android expert, you’re already fighting uphill. Or if the scope is heavy on mainframes (rare, but it happens), forcing yourself to keep going will only burn time and energy. One of the most important lessons I’ve learned is knowing when to stop. That’s why at the 100-hour mark, I step back and review my progress. I ask myself: Have I found anything that’s been triaged as valid? If the answer is no, then it’s time to pivot.

Before I move on, I make sure to document every bit of my findings - patterns, potential leads, weird behaviors in endpoints - in an Obsidian template I specifically built for this purpose. This way, even if this hunt doesn’t pay out now, I have a detailed record I can revisit for future hunts or similar programs. I document these kinda things when I was playing the THM CTFs, I started with recon and the process goes on and I even document tools I’ve used while playing or finding ^FLAGS^.

This approach keeps me clear of the sunk cost fallacy - the cognitive bias where you keep throwing more time, effort, and resources into something that’s already going nowhere. Psychologically, it’s liberating. Bug bounties are probabilistic by nature, much like poker. Sometimes the cards just aren’t in your favor, and forcing it only drains your focus for the next hand. Walking away at the right time preserves energy, sharpens your mindset, and keeps you ready for the moment a truly rewarding opportunity comes along.

Why This Rule Has Been a Game-Changer

Adopting the 100-Hour Rule shifted me from reactive to proactive hunting. Here’s the factual breakdown of its benefits, supported by insights from bug bounty pros and productivity research.

Better Time Management: I log hours with tools like Toggl, treating each program as a “project.” This mirrors freelance models, where fixed budgets prevent scope creep. Result? I’ve tripled my program throughput, from 5–6 per quarter to 15+.
Smarter ROI: Energy is finite. By capping time, I allocate it to high-potential targets. Data from YesWeHack indicates top earners focus on 10–20 programs yearly, not hundreds. My payouts have increased 2x, averaging $2,000+ per valid report.
Built-In Motivation and Urgency: The deadline creates “Parkinson’s Law” in action - work expands to fill time, so limits compress it productively. I hustle harder, using techniques like Pomodoro (25-minute focused bursts) to maintain momentum.
Clearer Headspace and Burnout Prevention: Bug bounties can be mentally taxing - rejections sting, isolation creeps in. The rule enforces breaks, aligning with WHO guidelines on work-life balance to avoid burnout. No more guilt over “failures”; it’s data for future hunts.

CONCLUSION

Bug bounty success isn’t solely about elite hacking skills - though those help. It’s about strategic time management, focused effort, and mental resilience in a field where 90% of submissions might fail (per Bugcrowd stats). The 100-Hour Rule has turned my chaotic hunts into efficient, rewarding sprints, helping me bag consistent bounties without sacrificing my well-being.

Is this rule for everyone? Maybe not - if you’re a specialist in one niche, deep dives might suit you better. But if you’re juggling multiple programs or feeling overwhelmed, give it a shot. Tweak it to 50 hours for smaller scopes or 200 for massive ones.
What’s your strategy?

Guard it fiercely, hunt smartly, and the vulnerabilities will reveal themselves.

Happy hunting, folks!