Add a security policy: report privately via GHSA, not the issue tracker - #2
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 3bb7a96477
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Adds private vulnerability-reporting guidance for Surfguard and links it from the README.
Changes:
- Defines qualifying vulnerabilities, supported versions, and disclosure expectations.
- Directs reports to GitHub Security Advisories or HackerOne.
Tip
If you aren't ready for review, convert to a draft PR.
Click "Convert to draft" or run gh pr ready --undo.
Click "Ready for review" or run gh pr ready to reengage.
Reviewed changes
Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.
| File | Description |
|---|---|
SECURITY.md |
Adds the repository security policy. |
README.md |
Links readers to the security policy. |
💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.
…but not SECURITY.md
Surfguard is an SSRF guard, so classification bugs are vulnerabilities — the kind of report this repo should route privately, and today nothing tells a researcher how.
This adds a SECURITY.md:
The README gains a short "Security" section linking the policy by absolute URL, so it works from GitHub and from the packaged gem (which ships README.md but not SECURITY.md). Gemspec untouched — SECURITY.md is a repo artifact, not gem payload.
Pairs with basecamp/.github#17, which adds the org-wide default; this repo-specific policy takes precedence for surfguard.