Only the latest release receives fixes. The 0.x series makes no compatibility
promise between minor versions, and this project carries no security guarantee:
do not deploy it as a security boundary. How to check that a download is the
one the project built is in RELEASING.md.
Use GitHub's private vulnerability reporting: open the Security tab and choose "Report a vulnerability". That channel is private and reaches the maintainers directly.
Do not open a public issue, a pull request or a discussion for a suspected vulnerability.
Include, as far as you can:
- the version, tag or commit you tested;
- how to reproduce it, ideally as a minimal case;
- what an attacker gains, and what they need in order to do it;
- anything about the configuration that matters, such as which adapter or policy source was in use.
What the project intends, rather than what it can guarantee: an acknowledgement that a person has read your report, then a status update once the maintainers understand the issue. There is no response-time commitment and no repair deadline. One maintainer, no release cycle, and no paid time on this: promising a service level here would be the kind of claim the rest of this repository exists to avoid.
Disclosure is meant to be coordinated by agreement. Tell us if you have a date in mind and the maintainers will say whether they can work to it. Credit goes to reporters who want it; say so in your report.
This project is not yet a security boundary. A report that a control is missing
is a roadmap item, not a vulnerability; see ROADMAP.md and
docs/status.md for what is planned.
What is in scope today:
- a defect in the repository itself: a build or release path that could be influenced by a contributor, a workflow that could leak a token, a dependency pinning mistake;
- a flaw in a published contract, in the canonical digest or in the experimental gateway that would let an approval be replayed, an action be misidentified, or a call run that its policy blocks;
- anything in this repository that would mislead an operator into believing a control exists when it does not. That is treated as a security defect here, not as a documentation bug.